IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2010 / 20TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4925 of 2010(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- AUGUSTINE GEORGE, S/O.LATE GEORGE, AGED 46,ANAPARAMBIL HOUSE,THALAYOLAPARAMBU P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT (NOW RESIDING AT APARTMENT NO. 1D, GOLDEN HEIGHTS, APARTMENTS, ELAMKULAM, KADAVANTHARA). BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI SRI.BENHUR JOSEPH MANAYANI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. REJI AUGUSTINE,W/O.AUGUSTINE GEORGE, PARTMENT NO.1D, GOLDEN HEIGHTS APARTMENTS, ELAMKULAM, KADAVANTHARA, COCHIN-20. 2. RAJU JOSE, S/O.LATE P.P.JOSE, PULLUKATTU VEEDU, CHANGANACHERRY. 3. ROY JOSEPH, S/O.LATE E.P.JOSEPH, PULLUKATTU VEEDU, CHANGANACHERRY. 4. MATHACHAN CHOLIKARA, CHOLIKARA VEEDU, RAMAPURAM. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAVANTHARA POLICE STATION, NEAR KADAVANTHARA MARKET, COCHIN-20. 6. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, VELLAYAMBALAM, TRIVANDRUM. 7. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, (HQ), TRIVANDRUM. 8. CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, COCHIN CITY, ERNAKULAM. G.P. SHRI T K VIPINDAS FOR R5-8 SHRI. BABU S NAIR FOR R1 SHRI S M PREM FOR R1 TO R4 SRI.C.A.CHACKO FOR R1 TO R4 SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK FOR R1 TO R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE RESPONDENTS 6 TO 8 DT. 8.2.2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIHBITS : NIL // TRUE COPY// K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 4925 of 2010 M - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The petitioner has approached this court for the following reliefs: i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding respondents 6 to 8 to render proper and sufficient police protection to thwart and avert the proposed offences of respondents 1 to 5. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding respondents 6 to 8 to enquire into the petitioner's Ext.P1 petition. iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding W.P.(C).No. 4925 of 2010 2 respondents 6 to 8 to give direction to the 5th respondent not to harass and ill treat the petitioner to support the illegal claims of respondents 1 to 4.” 2. Briefly the case of the petitioner is as follows. Petitioner is the husband of the first respondent. Respondents 2 and 3 are his brothers-in-law and the 4th respondent is a relative. It is not in dispute that the Magistrate has ordered maintenance to the first respondent, which has been stayed by the Sessions Court, subject to conditions. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 and also the learned Government Pleader. 4. Learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 submits that they have absolutely no intention to cause any threat to the life of the petitioner. 5. We record the said submission and close this Writ Petition. We also make it clear that respondents 6 to 8 shall not interfere in the disputes between the petitioner and the first respondent. We make it clear that we have not gone into the contentions raised or the rights W.P.(C).No. 4925 of 2010 3 canvassed in the matter. It is entirely open to any competent forum to decide the issue untrammeled by anything contained in this judgment. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm