IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 34680 of 2010(H) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- 1. LAKSHMIKUTTY, ELAMKONATHU VEEDU, EZHUKONE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. 2. SINDHU N. W/O. LATE ANIL KUMAR, ELAMKONATHU VEEDU, EZHUKONE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. 3. BINDHU L., W/O. BIJU & ANIL, ELAMKONATHU VEEDU, EZHUKONATHU VEEDU, EZHUKONE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM (FROM R.G.BHAVAN, KURUMANDAL, PARAVUR, KOLLAM) 4. BIJU @ ANIL, ELAMKONATHU VEEDU, EZHUKONE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM (FROM R.G.BHAVAN, KURUMANDAL, PARAVUR, KOLLAM) BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL SRI.SAIJU S. SRI.C.SINOY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, KOLLAM PIN 691 001. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EZHUKONE P.O. KOLLAM DISTRICT PIN-691505 3. THE SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE EZHUKONE POLICE STATION EZHUKONE P.O., KOLLAM PIN - 691505 4. SRI.LALGI, ASWATHY, EZHUKONE VILLAGE ESHUKONE P.O. KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691505. 5. SRI.AMAL S/O. LALGI, ASWATHY EZHUKONE VILLAGE ESHUKONE P.O., KOLLAM DISTRIC 691505. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. R4 & R5 BY ADV. SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.34680 OF 2010 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NO.4173/CAMP/PTN/2010-Q DATED 29-10-2010 FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND FIS IN CRIME NO.2685/2010 OF KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION. EXT.P3.TRUE COPY OF THE INCIDENT REPORTED IN THE KERALA KAUMUDI DAILY. EXT.P4.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 1.11.2010 FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.34680 of 2010-H ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 22nd day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “i) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents 1 to 3 to afford adequate and effective police protection for life and property of the petitioners and their family from the respondents 4 and 5 and their henchmen, associates or anybody. ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 1 to 3 to conduct a Confidence Investigation of the Criminal acts of Respondents 4 and 5 and their henchmen under the supervision of the Ist respondent and book the culprits under the clutches of law. iii) to declare that the petitioners and their family are entitled to get police protection for life and property from the respondents 4 and 5 and their henchmen, associates or anybody.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioners is as follows. First petitioner is the mother. Petitioners 2 and 3 are WPC 34680/2010 -2- her daughters and the 4th petitioner is the husband of the 3rd petitioner. The 2nd petitioner's husband was conducting a cashew business. He died leaving three children. The 2nd petitioner and the 3 minor children inherited the property and business. Because the 2nd petitioner was unable to manage the entire transaction power of attorney was given to the 3rd petitioner and they also requested petitioners 1, 3 and 4 to deal with the conduct of the business. The 4th respondent is the brother-in-law of late Anil Kumar, the husband of the 2nd petitioner and the 5th respondent is his son. The allegation is of threat and interference by respondents 4 and 5. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5. Learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 Sri.T.Ramprasad Unni submits that the allegations are not correct. He would submit that respondents 4 and 5 have no intention to cause any threat to the lives of the petitioners. We record the said submission and we direct that in case the petitioners bring any complaint of threat to their lives by respondents 4 and 5 before the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent will look into it WPC 34680/2010 -3- and if the threat is found to be genuine he shall provide protection to the lives of the petitioners as against respondents 4 and 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 that issue is pending in civil Court. We make it clear that we have not pronounced on the correctness of the allegations as such and the civil Court/forum shall proceed to decide the lis between the parties untrammelled by anything contained in this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS