IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2011 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 26909 of 2011(K) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- I.J. MANUAL @ MANI, S/O. JOSEPH, AGED 90 YEARS, ILLIPPARAMBIL HOUSE, VADUTHALA, KOCHI - 682 023, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SHERRY J. THOMAS. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM - 682 531. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM - 682 531. 3. JOSEPH SUNIL @ SUNIL, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. JOSEPH, MANUAL @ MANI, ILLIPPARAMBIL HOUSE, VADUTHALA, KOCHI - 682 023, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. GEORGE ANTONY @ SAJI, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. MANUAL @ MANI, ILLIPPARAMBIL HOUSE, VADUTHALA, KOCHI - 682 023, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.K. ABOOBACKER, R3 & R4 BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.26909/2011-K: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BEFORE THE R.2. DTD. 12/08/2011. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BEFORE THE R.2. DTD. 10/10/2011. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 16/2010 DTD. 11/03/2010 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Prv. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.26909 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose,J. The petitioner, a nonagenarian, has approached this court seeking direction for police protection against respondents 3 and 4, his own sons. On considering this petition for admission, we directed the second respondent to conduct a proper enquiry regarding the correctness of the allegations of the petitioner that there subsists threat to his life from the part of his own sons respondents 3 and 4. We issued notice to respondents 3 and 4 by special messenger. Today on the basis of instructions from 2nd respondent, it was submitted by Adv. Sri.N.K.Aboobacker that an enquiry was conducted. As part of the enquiry, the parties were summoned or met. All the issues between the petitioner and his children have been amicably settled. Now, the petitioner and his sons- respondents 3 and 4 are peacefully residing in the same W.P.(C) No.26909 of 2011 2 house. Smt.C.M.Charisma, the learned Government Pleader entered appearance for respondents 3 and 4. She submitted that the petitioner, father and respondents 3 and 4 sons are residing peacefully. 2. Advocate Sri. Sherry J.Thomas, however, does not agree to the submissions. He submitted that the petitioner was compelled to endorse his signature in the petition register maintained in the Police Station, due to fear. The petitioner's only daughter Shary is not allowed to visit the petitioner even once in a week. The petitioner is not allowed the liberty of going over to the church for attending the Sunday mass. We enquired of Smt.Charisma, whether her clients are having any objection to their only sister Shary visiting the father. The learned counsel submitted that there is no objection. We also enquired of her whether there is any objection in the petitioner attending the Sunday mass. To the above question also the answer was in the negative. Adv.Mr.Sherry J.Thomas submitted that the petitioner has already moved the Tribunal constituted under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act and Rules. The above Tribunal is yet W.P.(C) No.26909 of 2011 3 to dispose of the application. 3. Having considered the submissions and the various materials placed on record, we are of the view that the Writ Petition can be disposed of issuing the following directions: a) The petitioner's only daughter Shary should be allowed to visit the petitioner in his residential house(where respondents 3 and 4 are also residing along with him) on every Saturday between the hours from 2 P.M till 5.30 P.M. There should not be any obstruction from the part of respondents 3 and 4 to such visit. b) The respondents 3 and 4 will ensure that the petitioner is able to attend the Sunday holy mass every Sunday. c) The second respondent, Station House Officer having jurisdiction over the area where the petitioner resides will have due regard to the instructions issued by the DGP in Ext.P3 Circular No. 16 of 2010 dated 11.3.2010 and ensure that the W.P.(C) No.26909 of 2011 4 life and properties of the petitioner, a nonagenarian, a very Senior citizen are safe. d) The petitioner is permitted to move the Tribunal constituted under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act and Rules for early disposal of the application filed by him. If any such application is received by the Tribunal within three weeks from today, the learned Tribunal will pass appropriate orders and ensure that the application is disposed of at its earliest. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE cms