IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2011 / 24TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17730 of 2011(M) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------- MANJU SAM, AGED 39 YEARS, D/O. M.K.SAMUEL, PUTHENPARAMBIL CHELAKKAL HOUSE, KOTHAKULAM, VENNIKULAM P.O., PURAMATTOM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689 544. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOIPURAM POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689 531. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689 641. 3. THE SUERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689 645. 4. MATHEW VARGHESE, AGED 45 YEARS, PUTHENPARAMBIL CHELAKKAL HOUSE, KOTHAKULAM, VENNIKULAM P.O., PURAMATTOM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689 544. 5. ANNAMMA MATHEW, AGED 70 YEARS, PUTHENPARAMBIL CHELAKKAL HOUSE, KOTHAKULAM, VENNIKULAM P.O., PURAMATTOMN, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689 544. WP(C).No. 17730 of 2011(M) -2- 6. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY (HOME), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001. ADV. SMT.G.KRISHNAKUMARI FOR R5 GOVT. PLEADER SMT.C.M.MCHARISMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17730 of 2011(M) -3- APPENDIX PETITIONER's EXTS EXT.P1:- PHOTOCPY OF SALE CERTIFICATE NO.1/10 IN E.P.104/08 IN O.P.416/06 OF THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA. EXT.P2:- PHOTOCOPY OF DELIVERY KAICHIT IN E.P 104/08 IN O.P.416/06 OF THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA. EXT.P3:- PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 25/06/11 OF THE PETITIONER PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.17730 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J In this Writ Petition under Article 226, the petitioner a 39 year old lady seeks protection for her life and for the property purchased by her under Ext.P1 certificate and delivered over to her under Ext.P2 delivery report of the Family Court, Thiruvalla, against the 4th respondent, her husband and the 5th responder her mother-in-law. According to her, though she filed Ext.P3 petition before the Sub Inspector of Police/the first respondent, no action has been taken by the first respondent on the same. Smt.G.Krishnakumari, Advocate entering appearance on behalf of the 5th respondent submitted that the 5th respondent is a 70 year old lady and that she is not even W. P. C. No.17730 of 2011 -2- aware of purchase of Ext.P1 property by the petitioner. The whereabouts of her son, 4th respondent are not presently known. The 5th respondent has been unnecessarily dragged into the dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent. The 5th respondent is not aware of the details of the proceedings before the Family Court either. 5th respondent has never caused any threat to the life, person or to the property of the petitioner. Notice sent to the 4th respondent by post was returned as refused. 2. The learned Government Pleader Smt.C.M.Charisma on instructions submitted that Ext.P3 petition was received only recently by post. As soon as the same is received the first respondent conducted the enquiry and the enquiry reveals that there is no threat either to the life or to the property of the petitioner from respondents 4 or 5. If any real threat on the life of the petitioner or to the property of W. P. C. No.17730 of 2011 -3- the petitioner is reported, the first respondent will not hesitate to take appropriate action. 3. Having considered the rival submissions addressed at the Bar, we feel that the apprehension of the petitioner that there is a threat on her life and to her properties under Ext.P2 from the 5th respondent/mother-in-law is not well founded. But at the same time, we feel that there is some basis for the apprehension of the petitioner against the 4th respondent/her husband. Under the above circumstances, we dispose of the Writ Petition issuing the following directions:- 4. If the petitioner files any complaint before the first respondent voicing apprehensions of any further threat from the 4th respondent either on her life or in her continuing residence peacefully in the property covered by Ext.P2, the first respondent shall take immediate action and ensure that W. P. C. No.17730 of 2011 -4- the petitioner is able to live peacefully in her property covered by Ext.P2. Relief sought for against the 5th respondent is declined. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-