IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2007 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1929 WP(C).No. 18364 of 2007(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JALARAJ, S/O. CHRISTUDAS, JAYAVILASOM BUNGLOW, KODANGARA, MARIAPURAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PARASALA. 2. SHIBU, S/O. FRANCIS, KIDAREKUZHI ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, VENGADAMP, UCHAKADA P.O. 3. SHAJI, S/O. FRANCIS, -DO- 4. FRANCIS, -DO- -DO- 5. THILAKAM, W/O. FRANCIS, -DO- -DO- 6. VINCENT, S/O. PONNUMTHAN NADAR, BETHAL BHAVAN, VENGADAMP, UCHAKADA P.O. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO.18364/2007 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF PETITION FIELD BY THE PETITINER BEFOERE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 6.6.2007. / TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE. P.R. RAMAN & K. HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.18364 of 2007 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of June, 2007. JUDGMENT Raman, J. The petitioner and respondents 2 to 6 are closely related. It is the common case that family disputes are pending before the Family Court between the petitioner and his wife Shajitha. Respondents 4 and 5 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of the petitioner. Some criminal cases are also pending before the Magistrate Court. As a result of enmity between the parties, it is alleged that, respondents 2 to 6 are causing threat to the life of the petitioner and his aged mother is not even allowed to go to the vegetable shop. 2. Respondents 2 to 6 entered appearance through counsel and deny the allegations made. Allegations and counter allegations are, however, not matters which requires any adjudication by this Court in this proceedings, since these are all matters to be adjudicated upon before the appropriate forum. The Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the State, submits that the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Parassla is wrongfully impleaded and the proper officer is Deputy Superintendent of Police, Neyyattinkara, to whom the petitioner has given a complaint. It is submitted that the said Deputy Superintendent of Police has caused to conduct an inquiry through [WP(C).18364/07] 2 the Circle Inspector of Police, Parassala and found that there is no threat as alleged by the petitioner. It is submitted on behalf of respondent 2 to 6 that they have not caused any threat as alleged nor they have intention to cause any threat. This submission is recorded. In case, petitioner faces any threat in future, he can file written complaint by bringing to the notice of police specific instances of such threat, whereupon the Circle Inspector of Parassala, will do the needful in the matter. With the above observation, Writ Petition is closed. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.