IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2010 / 4TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 20525 of 2010(M) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. SALEENA, AGED 40 YEARS, W/O.SHAJAHAN, SOUMYA COTTAGE, CHEMPAMON, CHERUKULAM (P.O), CHUNDA, KADAKKAL, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. BABU, S/O.SREEDHARAN PILLAI, A.V.BHAVAN, PHILGIRI, CHERUKULAM (P.O), KOTTUKKAL MURI, KOTTUKKAL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM, S.P.OFFICE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 691 001. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 691 536. 3. THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 691 536. 4. BADARUDEEN.A, S/O.ABDULLA, SALEENA MANZIL (CHARIPARAMBIL), ITTIVA MURI, (CHERUKULAM(P.O), ITTIVA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 691 506. 5. MAJIDA BEEVI, W/O.BADARUDEEN, SALEENA MANZIL (CHARIPARAMBIL), ITTIVA MURI, (CHERUKULAM(P.O), ITTIVA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 691 506. 6. PATHUMMA BEEVI, SALEENA MANZIL (CHARIPARAMBIL), ITTIVA MURI, (CHERUKULAM(P.O), ITTIVA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 691 506. WP(C).No. 20525 of 2010(M) 7. SALIM, S/O.BADARUDEEN, ASIYA MANZIL, ITTIVA MURI, VAYYANAM (P.O), ITTIVA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 691 536. 8. SHARAFUDEEN, S/O.BADARUDEEN, SALEENA MANZIL (CHARIPARAMBIL), ITTIVA MURI, CHERUKULAM (P.O), ITTIVA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 691 506. 9. SHAMNA SALIM, W/O.SALIM, ASIYA MANZIL, ITTIVA MURI, VAYYANAM (P.O), ITTIVA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 691 536. 10. SHARIJA SHARAFUDEEN, SALEENA MANZIL (CHARIPARAMBIL), ITTIVA MURI, CHERUKULAM (P.O), ITTIVA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 691 506. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER GEORGE FOR R4 &6-10 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 20525 of 2010(M) PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1.TURE COPY OF LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 6.3.2010 OF THE ITTIVA VILLAGE OFFICE. EXT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE IST PETITIONER DATED 17.3.2010 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE IST PETITIONER DATED 20.3.2010 FILED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.3.2010 IN IA NO.1032/2010 IN OS.182/2010 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, KOTTARAKKARA. EXT.P5.TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.5.2010 IN I.A.NO.1301/2010 IN OS.244/2010 OF the MUNSIFF COURT, KOTTRARKARA. EXT.P6.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE IST PETITIONER DATED 17.4.2010 BEFORE THE 2ND 3RD RESPONDENTS. EXT.P7.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE IST PETITIONER DATED 5.5.2010 BEFORE THE 2ND 3RD RESPONDENTS. EXT.P8.TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND STATEMENT OF THE 2ND PETITIONER IN CRIME NO.741/2010 OF KADAKKAL POLICE STATION. K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.20525 of 2010-M ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 26th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioners seek the following relief: “ to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction commanding the respondents 1 to 3 to afford adequate and effective police protection to the life of the petitioners and the Ist petitioner's minor son from any threat by the respondents 4 to 10 and their men.” 2. We heard the learned counsel for the parties . We have already passed an interim order. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are not pressing the relief against the 5th respondent. In such circumstances, we do not deem it necessary that service should be completed on her. Learned counsel for respondents 4 and 6 to 10 submits that respondents 4 and 6 to 10 have no intention to cause any threat to the petitioners or the Ist petitioner's minor son. Besides recording the said submission of the learned counsel for respondents 4 and 6 to 10 we direct that in case WPC 20525/2010 -2- there is any threat to the lives of the petitioners and Ist petitioner's minor son from respondents 4 and 6 to 10 respondents 2 and 3 will provide adequate protection against any such threat. We make it clear that we have not pronounced on the correctness of the allegations and in case the matter comes before any Court/Forum that Court/Forum shall be free to decide the matter untrammelled by anything contained in this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS