IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2008 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 9191 of 2008(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ EDISON, S/O.JOHN WILLS, AGED 24 YEARS, MAVUVILA, THEKKARIU VENNIYOOR, VENGANOOR, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIZHINJAM, TRIVANDRUM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIZHINJAM, TRIVANDRUM, 3. THANKARAJAN, S/O. THAMPIKUNJAN NADAR, VARUVILA VEEDU, KALLIYOOR, KAKKAMOOLA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SHEEBA, D/O.SUMANGALA, VARUVILA VEEDU, KALLIYOOR, KAKKAMOOLA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.G.SIVASANKAR G.P.SRI. SALIM P.A. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.NO.9191/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIOENR BEFORE R2. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R1. /TRUE COPY/ CL K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N. RAVINDRAN, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.9191 OF 2008-T -------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J: The petitioner has approached this Court seeking police protection to his life from the threat of the 3rd respondent, who is his father-in-law and the 4th respondent, who is his wife. The petitioner and the 4th respondent got married on 24.5.2007. Soon thereafter they separated. 25 cents of land are jointly owned by them. The said property was purchased under two sale deeds. According to the petitioner, the entire sale consideration was paid by him whereas, the 3rd respondent submitted that it was he, who paid the sale consideration and it was the property meant for his daughter. The petitioner has filed a civil suit seeking an injunction against respondents 3 and 4 and others restraining them from trespassing into the said property. While so, respondents 3 and 4 and their supporters started threatening and harassing him. So, he filed Exts.P1 and P2 representations before the police. Since the police did not extend any help, the writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: WPC.NO.9191/08 . 2 “Issue a writ of mandamus and other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents 1 and 2 to afford adequate and effective police protection to the life of the petitioner and his family members from 3rd and 4th respondents and their henchmen.” 2. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations against her and her father. The 4th respondent was harassed claiming dowry and, therefore, on her complaint, the police have registered a crime under Section 498 A of the I.P.C against the petitioner and his parents. The petitioner got anticipatory bail in that crime and thereafter, he started threatening and harassing the 4th respondent and her family members. Against that, they have moved the police. According to them, in fact, they require protection from the illegal and high handed actions of the petitioner. 3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that on receiving the complaint, both sides were summoned to the police station and strictly warned not to create any law and order problem. WPC.NO.9191/08 . 3 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has no intention, what so ever, to threaten or harass or harm respondents 3 and 4. The same is the stand of respondents 3 and 4. On their behalf, the learned counsel submitted that they have no intention, what so ever, to physically harm or threaten the petitioner. In view of the above submissions, we feel that we need not issue any positive direction to the police in this regard. Recording the above submissions, the writ petition is closed. But, this will not affect the powers of the police to investigate any cognizable offence reported to them. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. cl WPC.NO.9191/08 . 4