IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 5TH OCTOBER 2010 / 13TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 21978 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: SULOCHANA, W/O.BHARATHAN, EDAYODIYIL(H), VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.SUNIL RESPONDENTS: 1. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIKOM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIKOM. 4. RAJU, S/O.RAMAN, KODALICHIRA (H), PALLIYADU KARA, THALAYAZHAM P.O., VAIKOM 686147. 5. NANDATHMAJAN, PULAYANTHURUTHU HOUSE, THALAYAZHAM P.O., VAIKOM, 686147. 6. SADASIVAN, PADMALAYAM (H), THALAYAZHAM P.O., VAIKOM, 686 147. 7. MANOJ, VALLYATHARA(H), THALAYAZHAM P.O., VAIKOM 686147. 8. RAMACHANDRAN, NARAYANI BHAVAN, NEAR ARADHANA HOSPITAL, THALAYAZHAM P.O., VAIKOM, 686147. 9. BAIJU, PARAPPALLYTHARA, THALAYAZHAM P.O., VAIKOM 686147. R1 TON R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. RANI DIOTHIMA ADV. SRI.K.N.BALACHANDRAN KARTHA FOR 4-9 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC. 21978/2010 APPENDIX: PETITIONERR'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE CHEQUE ISSUED BY MR. JOY TO THE PETITIONER'S SON-IN-LAW. EXT.P3: TRUE COPIES OF THE CHEQUES ISSUED BY MR. JOY TO THE BROTHER AND OTHER RELATIONS OF THE PETITIONER'S SON-IN-LAW. EXT.P4: TRUE COPYY OF TH COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DTED 6/1/2010 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF TH COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15/1/2010. EXT.P6: TRUE COPIES OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE POLICE STATION. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20/4/2010 SUBMITTED BY TH 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE J.F.C.M.COURT. VAIKOM. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF TH ORDER DATED 25/6/2010 IN B.A. NO. 3758/2010 OF THIS COURT. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY FO THE DISCHARGE CARD OF THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND ISSUD FROM MCH KOTTAYAM. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE REFERRAL CASUALTY RECORD OF THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND. RESPONDENTS' EXTS: EXT.R4(1) TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 31/5/2010 SUBMITTED BY RAJU BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIKOM. EXT.R4(2) TRUE COPY FO THE AGREEMENT MADE ON 16/2/2009 BEFORE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND BHARATHAN AND DASAN. ks. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE K.M.JOSEPH & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C) NO. 21978 OF 2010 ============================ Dated this the 5th day of October 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief: i)To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order of this Honourable court directing respondents 1 to 3 to give adequate and proper protection to the life of the petitioner and her husband from the threats and violences of respondents 4 to 9 and men under them. 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: The petitioner is uneducated and illiterate lady. She along with her husband is now leading a life of exile from their house. They have two daughters. Husband of the petitioner's elder brother was previously employed in a Gulf country and he lost the job and returned to India. One of his friends introduced him to a local overseas recruiter by name Mr.Joy and his associate Miss Molly. They offered him to arrange a job visa in Australia. A WPC. 21978/2010 2 cheque was given as security. It is stated that Mr.Joy and Molly told the petitioner's son-in-law that it was a group visa and some more persons were required in the group. They asked the petitioner's son-in-law to introduce some more persons. The petitioner's son-in-law introduced his brother, a son of his sister and another relation and respondents 4 to 9 and some others to Mr.Joy and Molly and all of them have given money to the said Joy and Molly. It is stated that respondents 4 to 9 are petitioner's neighbours and now they are against the petitioner. Respondents 4 to 9 and few others trespassed into the house of the petitioner, threatened and abused. The petitioner has filed complaint before the third respondent and no action was taken on the same. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed by respondent No.4 on behalf of respondents 6 to 9 to which reply affidavit is filed. They would allege that they were being cheated. 4. We heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the filing of the writ petition, petitioner and her husband are residing in their own house. The learned counsel for the party respondents would submit that on the basis of the interim order of this Court, WPC. 21978/2010 3 they were attacked. They would submit that all that the party respondents did was that they went and demanded back the money. 5. In the light of the apprehension of the petitioner, we dispose of the writ petition as follows: In case there is any threat to the life of the petitioner and her husband by any of the party respondents, the petitioner can bring the same to the notice of the third respondent and the third respondent will look into the complaint and if it is found to be genuine, he shall afford protection for the life of the petitioner as against the party respondents or such of them who are found to be threatening the life of the petitioner. We make it clear that when the matter comes up before any court, the court shall proceed to decide the matter untrammelled by anything contained in this judgment. Sd/- K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/- M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE ks. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE WPC. 21978/2010 4