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 23RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 4603 of 2010(A) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. SHAMSUDHEEN, AGED 35, S/O.SALAVUDEEN, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, PLACHERI PO, KALAYANADU, VALAKKODU VILLAGE, PATHANAAPURAM TALUK. 2. SHEMIDA BEGAM, AGED 30 YEARS, D/O.SHARIFA BEEVI, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, PLACHERI PO, KALAYANADU, VALAKKODU VILLAGE, PATHANAAPURAM TALUK. ** : NAME OF THE FIRST PETITIONER CORRECTED AS 'SHAMNADKHAN' AS PER ORDER DATED 18.2.2000 IN I.A. NO. 2373 OF 2010. BY ADV. SRI.AJAYAKUMAR .G RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESETNED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUNALUR POLICE STATION. 5. ACHUTHANANDAN @ ACHUTHAN, AGED 52, S/O.GOKULDAS, KILIMANGALATH, THRIKKARIYOR NELLIKKUZHI, KOTHAMANGALAM. 6. LEENA K.S, AGED 45, D/O.SANTHAMMA, KARIYADATHU VEEDU, POLLATHAI PO, S.L.PURAM, ALAPPUZHA. BY G.P., SRI. T K VIPINDAS FOR R1 TO R4. ADV. SRI.K.V.SABU FOR R5,6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF THE COMPLAINT FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 4603 of 2010 A - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 4 to afford sufficient police protection to the life and property of the petitioners. 2. Briefly the case of the petitioners is as follows. Petitioners are husband and wife. They are doing business. Respondents 5 and 6 were business partners of the petitioners. They borrowed Rs. 15 Lakhs on various occasions . When the petitioners demanded back the amount, they issued a cheque in favour of the first petitioner. When the cheque was presented for encashment, it was dishonoured. On knowing about the presentation of the cheque, respondents 5 and 6 started intimidating the petitioners through phone. On 8.2.2010, some W.P.(C).No. 4603 of 2010 2 goondas came to their house and threatened to do away with the life of the petitioners, if the cheque is not returned within two days. 3. It is stated that the petitioners are receiving telephone calls claiming to be police officers attached to the office of Alleppey Deputy Superintendent of Police, threatened that false cases will be registered against the petitioners, if the cheque is not returned. 4. We heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for respondents 5 and 6 as also the learned Government Pleader. 5. The learned counsel for respondents 5 and 6 submits that there is no threat from them. The petitioners are actually liable to pay Rs. 32 Lakhs to the 6th respondent. 6. In these circumstances, we dispose of the Writ Petition as follows. We record the submission of respondents 5 and 6 that they will not cause any harm to the petitioners. We direct that if there is any threat to the petitioners by respondents 5 and 6 or at their instance, respondents 2 to 4 will provide adequate protection to the life of the petitioners. We further make it clear that we are not pronouncing on W.P.(C).No. 4603 of 2010 3 the monetary claim made by the parties against each other and that is a matter to be considered by appropriate forum, if the parties are advised to invoke their jurisdiction. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm