IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 37740 of 2009(J) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- LAKSHMI, W/O NARAYANAN, VRIDHAVANAM, KARIYILAKULANGARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.V.K.SATHYANATHAN SRI.B.BIPIN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HARIPPADU. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAREELAKULANGARA. 5. SATHYASHEELA PANICKER, THANKU BHAVANAM, CHEPPADE VILLAGE, CHINGOLI P.O., THOTTUKADAVIL, PIN- 690507. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.37940/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT WIDE CMP. NO.281/2006. P2:- COPY OF THE FIR, DTD. 18.12.2006 IN CRIME NO.40/06 OF KARIYILAKULANGARA POLICE STATION. P3- COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION. P4- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 26.12.2009. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JJUDGE tss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.37740 of 2009-J ***************************** Dated this the 16th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution to respondents 1 to 4 to afford police protection to her to abate the perceived threat to her life from the 5th respondent. 2. According to the petitioner, her son is a Kargil martyr and the Government, to help her, had alloted a gas agency to her. It is her case that a manager appointed by her had forged documents and completely mismanaged the gas agency. This had obliged her to make a complaint against the said manager and others. The 5th respondent figures as an accused in that complaint. The 5th respondent, the petitioner alleged, is causing threat to the life of the petitioner. The petitioner, in these circumstances, claimed directions to afford protection to her from the threat perceived from the 5th respondent. 3. When this petition came up for hearing on 30.12.2009, the Bench which dealt with the matter granted W.P(C) No.37740 of 2009-J 2 interim order of protection and “directed respondents 1 to 4 to provide adequate and effective protection to the life of the petitioner from any threat by 5th respondent and his henchmen.” That interim order has remained in force from 30.12.2009 without any objection from anyone. The learned Government Pleader submits that in the perception of the respondent/police officials, there is no threat now to the life or person of the petitioner. But in any case, interim order is being given effect to. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays and the learned Government Pleader raises no objection against making the said interim order absolute and this proceedings being closed. 4. We are satisfied that the interim directions which have remained in force from 30.12.2009 extracted above can be made absolute and this proceedings can be closed. 5. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is allowed; b) The interim order dated 30.12.2009 is made absolute; c) If the petitioner perceives any threat from the 5th respondent against her life or person, she can complain to respondents 1 to 4, who shall take necessary action to afford W.P(C) No.37740 of 2009-J 3 protection to the petitioner. 6. It is made clear that this order will not in any way justify police interference in any civil disputes between respondents 1 to 5 about the documents allegedly executed or the conduct of the gas agency. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/