IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 18TH MAY 2010 / 28TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13397 of 2010(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. MOHAMMED KUNJU, SUBAIDA MANZIL, MUTTAPPALAM, NADAYARA, S.V.PURAM, P.O.VARKALA. 2. AFEERA BEEVI, SUBAIDA MANZIL, MUTTAPPALAM, NADAYARA, S.V.PURAM, P.O.VARKALA. 3. ADV.M.NAUSHAD, SUBAIDA MANZIL, MUTTAPPALAM, NADAYARA, S.V.PURAM, P.O.VARKALA. 4. SUBAIDA, SUBAIDA MANZIL, MUTTAPPALAM, NADAYARA, S.V.PURAM, P.O.VARKALA. 5. SUMINA, SUBAIDA MANZIL, MUTTAPPALAM, NADAYARA, S.V.PURAM, P.O.VARKALA. BY ADV. SRI.R.GOPAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ATTINGAL. 4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARKALA POLICE STATION. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARKALA POLICE STATION. 6. MEHIJA, D/O.SHAMSUDEEN, VILAYIL VEEDU, NADAYARA, VARKALA.P.O. 7. HAYARUNNISA, D/O.RAHIM, VILAYAIL VEEDU, NADAYARA, VARKALA.P.O. 8. NIZARUDEEN, S/O.SHAMSUDEEN, DO. DO. G.P. SHRI T K VIPINDAS FOR R1 TO R5 ADV. SRI.ARUN.B.VARGHESE FOR R6-8 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT.19.4.2010. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL // TRUE COPY // K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 13397 of 2010 Y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The petitioners have approached this Court complaining harassment at the hands of respondents 3 to 5, who are police officers. A direction is sought for an enquiry against the third respondent. The petitioners have also sought for a direction to respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5 to provide adequate protection to the lives of the petitioners from the hands of respondents 6 to 8. 2. Briefly the case of the petitioners is as follows. Petitioners 1 and 2 are husband and wife. Third petitioner is their son and petitioners 4 and 5 are their daughters. They have taken a loan from the 6th respondent. Respondents 7 and 8 are close relatives of the 6th respondent and the 6th respondent handed over some blank signed cheque leaves and papers of petitioners 1 to 3 to respondents 7 and 8. They also filed complaint against W.P.(C).No. 13397 of 2010 2 the petitioners. There is a case that the third respondent directed the petitioners to pay the amount or to execute a Sale Deed and the third respondent assaulted the petitioners. 3. We heard learned counsel for the parties, including the learned Government Pleader. 4. There is no dispute that a crime has been registered against the petitioners. It is the case of the petitioners that they have obtained interim order not to arrest them in regard to the said crime. 5. In view of the facts mentioned above, we dispose of the Writ Petition as follows. It is open to the official respondents to take action in regard to the crime registered in accordance with law. We direct respondents 2 and 5 to provide adequate protection to the lives of the petitioners from the hands of respondents 6 to 8. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm