IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 7468 of 2011(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ALPONSAMMA, AGED 61 YEARS, RANI VILLA, NEAR KADINAMKULAM PANCHAYATH, KADINAMKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.J.SAJI ISAAC DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADINAMKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. NOBLE RAJ, C/O.ANDREWS, KUZHIVILAKAM, MATHA ROAD, FATHIMA CHURCH, VALIYATHURA P.O., THRIUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. JAYARAJ, C/O.CYRIL ROHALS, KARINJAVAYIL, MENAMKULAM, KAZHAKOOTTAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER: SMT. C.M. CHARISMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SM WPC NO.7468 OF 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 24.02.2011 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY SM P.A. TO JUDGE R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.7468 of 2011-G ***************************** Dated this the 21st day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Petitioner, a widow aged 61 years, has come to this Court with this petition for issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to the 1st respondent Sub Inspector of Police to afford police protection to her against contumacious, culpable and violent acts of her sons, respondents 2 and 3. 2. According to the petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 are her children. She resides in a building in a residential property. The property and the building belong to the petitioner. The 2nd and 3rd respondents have no rights over that property. They are demanding the petitioner to transfer the property in their name. The petitioner is unwilling. Because of such unwillingness, respondents 2 and 3 are indulging in contumacious, culpable and violent acts. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution. 3. Respondents 2 and 3 have been served. They have not chosen to enter appearance. W.P(C) No.7468 of 2011-G 2 4. In these circumstances, we turned to the learned Government Pleader representing the 1st respondent to explain. The learned Government Pleader submits after taking instructions from the 1st respondent that respondents 2 and 3 are compelling the petitioner to transfer the property in her name to their name. A complaint to this effect has been received. Respondents 2 and 3 were called to the police station and were strictly warned against indulgence in such conduct. In the meantime this Court had on 16.03.2011 issued interim direction to the 1st respondent “to afford police protection to the life of the petitioner against any contumacious and culpable acts on the part of respondents 2 and 3”. The said interim order is being complied with strictly, submits the learned Government Pleader on behalf of the 1st respondent. That order can be made absolute. If there be any threat against the person or life of the petitioner from respondents 2 and 3, necessary action shall be promptly taken by the 1st respondent, it is submitted. W.P(C) No.7468 of 2011-G 3 5. We are satisfied that this petition can be allowed and the interim direction can be made absolute. 6. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is allowed; b) The interim direction dated 16.03.2011 extracted above is made absolute. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/