IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2011 / 10TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 23393 of 2011(Y) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------- JIJI MATHEW, D/O.M.M.MATHEW, AGED 35 YRS MANAPURATH HOUSE, THIRUVAMPADI AMSOM,DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT BY ADV. JIJI MATHEW(PARTY-IN-PERSON) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,THIRUVAMBADY POLICE STATION,KOZHIKODE DIST-673603 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-31 * ADDL. R3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), KOZHIKODE, VADAKARA. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.JAIBY PAUL *[ADDL. R3 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DT.26/08/11] THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 23393 of 2011(Y) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER PETITION (CRL.). 42/2011 OF THIS HON. COURT DATED 22/06/11. EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION TO KOZHIKODE RURAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DT.22/08/11. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.23393 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT Abdul Rehim, J This Writ Petition is filed by a lady aged 36 years who is resident of Thiruvambady amsom in Kozhikode District, seeking direction to the 1st respondent to give adequate protection to herself and her parents. The petitioner is inter alia seeking directions to the 1st respondent to proceed against the alleged miscreants by arresting them and taking actions under law. 2. It is alleged that the petitioner and her parents are living under constant threat of several neighbours, against whom various criminal cases are pending. It is further stated that the petitioner along with her parents have filed a transfer petition seeking to transfer various criminal cases pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Thamarassery to the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, W. P. C. No.23393 of 2011 -2- Kozhikode. The said Transfer Petition T.P.(Crl.) No.42/11 is pending disposal before this Court. It is further alleged that certain neighbours of the petitioner had trespassed into her property and attacked her father on 20/08/11 and on 21/08/11. Eventhough the petitioner had approached the first respondent with complaint, no action was taken. She had also complained to the higher police officials and filed WP(C) No.9290/11 in which this Court had issued direction to afford police protection. But the threat from the neighbours continues and that the 1st respondent as well as the 3rd respondent are not taking any steps, is the allegations. 3. The petitioner appeared as 'party in person' and contended that the life of herself and her parents are under severe threat and that they are not in a position to continue peaceful life at their place of residence. On 26/08/11 when the Writ Petition came up for admission, we directed the Government Pleader to seek instructions from the 3rd respondent as to the correctness of the accusations made. It was also directed to ascertain whether any action was taken W. P. C. No.23393 of 2011 -3- on the basis of Ext.P2. We have also perused judges papers of W.P.(C). No.9290/11 as well as Transfer Petition T.P.(Crl.) No.42/11. 4. We notice that W.P.(C) No.9290/11 was filed by the petitioner along with her parents seeking direction against the respondents 1 and 3 herein, to afford protection to their lives and also seeking directions to take actions on the basis of complaints submitted by the petitioners, within a time frame. While disposing of the said Writ Petition, this Court issued directions as follows:- “In the result, a) This Writ Petition is allowed in part. b) We accept the submissions of the learned counsel for the third respondent and the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. c) We direct that if there be any threat against the petitioners, the petitioners shall be at liberty to complain to the first respondent who shall take appropriate and necessary action as undertaken by the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 and 2.” 5. We also notice that, in the Transfer Petition T.P. (Crl.) W. P. C. No.23393 of 2011 -4- No.42/11 this Court had called for a report from the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Thamarassery. In the report submitted by the learned Magistrate, we particularly take note of the fact that, steps as contemplated under Sections 328 and 329 of Cr.P.C had already been initiated against the petitioner herein (who is the 3rd petitioner in the Transfer Petition). We further notice that, such proceedings initiated by the Magistrate was challenged by the petitioner before this Court by filing Crl.M.C. No.211/11. But this Court had declined to interfere, and confirmed the order passed by the Magistrate's Court. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Civil Surgeon, as ordered by the Magistrate's Court. With respect to all other allegations leveled in the Transfer Petition, it was reported by the learned Magistrate as not genuine and made without any basis. 6. Learned Government Pleader on the basis of instructions received from the 1st respondent submitted about the history of the previous cases as enumerated above. However, it is stated that, the 1st respondent had W. P. C. No.23393 of 2011 -5- summoned the persons on the opposite side to the police station and informed them about the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.9290/11 and they were warned strictly, not to harass the petitioner and her family members either mentally or physically. It is further stated that the petitioner herein had not co-operated with the police to comply with the order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Thamarassery, for producing her before a Psychiatrist or Clinical Psychologist for care and treatment. Besides it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the first respondent had conducted frequent visits to the residence of the petitioner and afforded her protection and advised to intimate about threat if any caused from the side of anybody. It is stated that at present there is no threat to the lives of the petitioner or her family members. 7. While dealing with the present Writ Petition, we notice that the petitioner, who is one among the petitioners in W.P.(C). No.9290/11, had sought for identical reliefs and this Court through judgment dated 04/04/11 had issued W. P. C. No.23393 of 2011 -6- necessary directions to the respondents 1 and 3 to afford adequate and effective protection. In this Writ Petition no particular instance is pointed out with respect to any failure on the part of respondents 1 and 3 in complying with the directions issued. However, even if the petitioner has got any grievance regarding non-compliance with the directions contained in the judgment in W.P.(C) No.9290/11, the remedy is not to file a further Writ Petition seeking identical reliefs. It is left open to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy for taking actions under the provisions of the Contempt of Court Act in such case. We do not think that it is proper or justified on the part of this court to entertain this Writ Petition which is filed with identical reliefs which were already granted from this Court. We also take note of the incidental circumstances, in which the Magistrate's Court had already initiated steps against the petitioner, under Sections 328 and 329 of the Cr.P.C. 8. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed without prejudice to rights of the petitioner to initiate appropriate W. P. C. No.23393 of 2011 -7- steps if there is any violation of the directions contained in the judgment in W.P.(C) No.9290/11. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-