IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2011 / 31ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18284 of 2011(I) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. SUDERSANA BABU, AGED 70, S/O.MADHAVAN, KARIYILACHIRA MELATHIL VEEDU, EARAM VADAKKU, (ANCHAL PANCHAYATH WARD I), PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. SUNIL KUMAR, AGED 39, S/O.SUDERSANA BABU, KARIYILACHIRA MELATHIL VEEDU, EARAM VADAKKU, (ANCHAL PANCHAYATH WARD I), PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR SRI.N.SASANKAN PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. MANOHARAN, S/O.LATE GOPALAN ACHARY, GOPAMANGALATHU VEEDU, POWER HOME WARD, PUNALUR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 305. W.P.(C) 5. MADANAN, S/O.LATE GOPALAN ACHARY, GOPAMANGALATHU VEEDU, POWER HOUSE WARD, PUNALUR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 305. 6. MANOJ, S/O.LATE GOPALAN ACHARY, GOPAMANGALATHU VEEDU, POWER HOUSE WARD, PUNALUR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.CHARISMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.18284/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 9.4.2011. P2:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 23.4.2011. P3:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 3.5.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.18284 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd July, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioners - father and son have approached this Court complaining that respondents 4 to 6 who are the brothers in law of the second petitioner are posing real threat on their lives and properties. It is alleged that on 8.4.2011 in the early hours of the day respondents 4 to 6 criminally trespassed into the residential house of the petitioner and assaulted them by using deadly weapons including an iron road resulting in serious injuries to the head and other portions of the body of the petitioners. The complaint is that though Ext.P1 was submitted to the police, the police has not taken any action. As directed by this Court, Smt.Charisma, the learned Government Pleader has taken instructions from the police and she submitted that in the beginning, there was some bad blood estrangement between the second petitioner and his wife WPC No.18284/2011 2 and the police had registered Crime No.383 of 2004 under Section 498A and other offences against the second petitioner. However, later, the issue between the second petitioner and his wife were all settled. Accordingly, the criminal case was compromised after it was listed for trial by the Magistrate. However, there has been further conflicts between the parties and the police have actually received Ext.P1 complaint from the petitioner. Ext.P1 complaint was enquired into and it was revealed that the wife and children of the second petitioner are residing in the family house along with respondents 4 to 6. But, according to the enquiry, at the moment, there is no law and order problem and the parties are residing at safe distance of 15 kms. As directed by us, Smt.Charisma has given to us the written statement of instructions which was given to her by the Sub Inspector of Police. On going through the statement, we find that nothing is stated as to the complaint in Ext.P1 that serious injuries were sustained by the second petitioner due to the assault of respondents 4 to 6. We feel that Ext.P1 requires further enquiry at the hands of the third petitioner. As it is WPC No.18284/2011 3 reported that there is no law and order problem at the moment, we are not inclined to issue the directions sought for. However, we dispose of this writ petition issuing the following directions: The third respondent will conduct further enquiry into Ext.P1, particularly, as regards the complaint that serious bodily injuries including head injuries were sustained by the petitioner and if the said enquiry reveals that there is some truth in the allegations in Ext.P1, the needful will be done by the third respondent. sd/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE true copy P.S.TO JUDGE css/ WPC No.18284/2011 4