IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 30858 of 2010(F) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SHAJI.B., S/O.BHADRAN, AMRUTHA HOUSE, KURUVIKONAM, AREEPLACHY P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 333. BY ADV. SRI.K.MADHUSOODHANAN NAIR SRI.K.K.SETHUKUMAR SRI.N.REJO NOOR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM-691001. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANCHAL CIRCLE OFFICE, ANCHAL P.O., KOLLAM, PIN-691 306. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANCHAL POLICE STATION, ANCHAL, KOLLAM, PIN-691 306. 4. SACHIN.S., THAVARATH VEEDU, AREEPLACHY P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 333. 5. KSHEMA, THAVARATH VEEDU, AREEPLACHY P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 333. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. ADV. SRI.M.R.RAJENDRAN NAIR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R4& 5 SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) FOR R4,5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.30858 OF 2010: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 4.10.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED REPLY AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIOENR BEFORE THE MAGISTRATE COURT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R5A.TRUE COPY OF THE PROFILE GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER IN KERALA MATRIMONY.COM. EXT.R5B. TRUE COPY OF THE DIVORCE PETITION IN OP (DIVORCE) 649/2010 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT KOTTARAKKARA FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.R5C. TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE FAMILY COURT KOTTARAKKARA IN OP (DIVORCE) 649/2010. EXT.R5D. TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT WHICH IS NUMBERED AS CMP 12070/2010. EXT.R5E. TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT FOR EXPARTE INTERIM ORDER WHICH IS NUMBERED AS CMP NO.12071/2010. EXT.R5F. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE JFMC-I PUNALUR IN CMP NO.12071/2010. K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.30858 of 2010-F ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 24th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief: “ to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction against the respondents 1 to 3 to render adequate and sufficient police protection to the life and property of the petitioner from illegal and unlawful activities of 4th and 5th respondents.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner married the 5th respondent. In that wedlock a child is born. There are problems between them. Petitioner is a self-made man. The 4th respondent is a close associate of one of the well-known spirit mafia. He is the brother of the 5th respondent. Allegation is made about the incident which took place on 4.10.2010. Petitioner filed Ext.P1 complaint. Alleging inaction petitioner is before us. 3. The party respondents have filed a counter affidavit producing Exts.R5 (a) to R5 (f). Ext.R5(a) is the copy of profile given by the petitioner in the Kerala Matrimony. WPC 30858/2010 -2- com. There is a divorce petition filed as Ext.R5 (b). Ext.R5(c) is the notice issued by the Court. Ext.R5(d) and (e) are the petition filed under the Domestic Violence Act. Ext.R5(f) is the order of the Judicial Magistrate of the I Class-I, Punalur. Petitioner has filed a reply affidavit producing Ext.P2. 4. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 and also the learned Government Pleader. Learned counsel for the party respondents draws our attention to the discrepancies between the pleadings in the writ petition and the allegations in Ext.P1complaint. 5. Learned Government Pleader would submit that a crime has been registered against the 4th respondent at the instance of the petitioner. Having regard to the circumstances we dispose of the writ petition as follows: If there is any complaint filed by the petitioner seeking protection alleging threat from the 4th respondent before the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent will look into the same and if the threat is found to be genuine, he shall afford WPC 30858/2010 -3- protection to the life of the petitioner as against the 4th respondent. We make it clear that when the matter is taken up by the Family Court or by the Magistrate, the said Court/Magistrate shall proceed to decide the matter untrammelled by anything contained in this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS