IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2008 / 11TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 13041 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ GEORGE,S/O. LATE RAPHAEL, AGED 75 YEARS PUTHENPURAKAL, KUREEKADU P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN CODE 682 305 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.GEORGE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ERNAKULAM CITY, ERNAKULAM 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE UDAYAMPEROOR POLICE STATION UDAYAMPEROOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 3. MARIAMMA, D/O. PATHROSE, AGED 60 YEARS PUTHEMPURAKAL KUREEKADU P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 4. LAKSHMANAN, S/O. THANKAMMA, AGED 40 YEARS PUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE, KUREEKADU P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 5. C.N.RAVI,AGED 50 YEARS, CHITTETH HOUSE KADUNGAMANGALAM, KUREEKADU P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.A.BALAGOPALAN FOR R3 SRI.A.RAJAGOPALAN FOR R3 SR.GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 13041/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT TO THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM DATED 28.12.2007. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 13041 OF 2008-C ----------------------------------------- Dated 2nd July, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner submits, the 3rd respondent, who is a widow, was residing with him for the last 36 years. Recently, she conspired with respondents 4 and 5 to kill him. His underwear was immersed in poison, so that when he wears the same, he will be killed. But, he survived that assassination attempt. So, he filed Ext.P1 representation before the 1st respondent Commissioner of Police, pointing out the above incident. The Commissioner forwarded the matter to the 2nd respondent. But, the said respondent did not take any effective action. The said officer dealt with the petitioner, as if he is having some mental illness. In the above background, this Writ Petition is filed, seeking the following reliefs: “(i) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to give adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner. (ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to initiate proper investigation in pursuance of Ext.P1.” 2. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit, in which it is WPC 13041/2008 2 submitted that the petitioner has got another wife and children. He started residing with her for some time. The property in which the petitioner and the 3rd respondent are residing now, was purchased by her, using her hard earned money, though the sale deed is registered in the name of the petitioner also. She denies all the allegations made against her, as unfounded and false. 3. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and counter allegations, we feel that this is not a fit case for this Court to interfere, invoking its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. But, we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case of the petitioner. He may invoke the ordinary remedies available to him under the Codes of Criminal Procedure and Civil Procedure, to redress his grievance. Subject to that observation, the Writ Petition is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. Nm/ WPC 13041/2008 3