IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL THURSDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30674 of 2011(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- TELMA MARY,W/O.ANTONY DAS,THENGUVILA VEEDU, PADAPPAKKARA P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN SMT.R.S.SREEVIDYA SMT.DHANYA S.DHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,(RURAL) KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 001. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM 691 501. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUNDARA POLICE STATION KOLLAM, 691 501. 4. JOSE @ SAJU @ BOMDAY DHADHA,S/O.BARTHALO KAATUVILA KIZHAKKATHIL,PADAPPAKKARA P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 503. 5. ANTAPPAN,S/O.PLENTHERIL,KAATUVILA KIZHAKKETHIL,PADAPPAKKARA P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 503. 6. BENZIL,AUTO RICKSHAW DERIVER, KAYALAVARATHU,PONNANIKKELL, PADAPPAKKARA KOLLAM 691 503. 7. SALIM,S/O.PETER,CHONKIPOIKA, PADAPPAKKARA KOLLAM 691 503. 8. BABY @ JATRUDE,AANANDA VILASAM, PADAPPAKKARA KOLLAM 691 503. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN (R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.30674/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: PHOTOCPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH FI STATEMENT. EXT.P2: PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION DATED 3/11/2011. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.30674 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioner, a house wife, has filed this writ petition seeking interalia directions for police protection for the lives of herself and her family members from the alleged atrocities being perpetrated by respondents 4 to 8. According to the petitioner, respondents 4 to 8 are habitually extracting sand unauthorisedly from the bed of Padappakkara Lake and they are trespassing into the petitioner's property for easy transportation of sand so extracted. As the petitioner opposed this and moved the police, the police have registered Ext.P1 FIR against some of the party respondents. The respondents 4 to 8 are even now threatening the petitioner and members of her family, which includes mentally retarded sister and son, with physical injuries. 4. Having gone through Ext.P1, we are of the view that it may not be proper to blame the police of total lethargy towards the complaint submitted by the petitioner. We find that the petitioner has submitted Ext.P2 fresh petition before the first WPC.No.30674/2011 2 respondent. We are of the view that limited relief can be given to the petitioner even without issuing notice to the party respondents. We dispose of this writ petition in the following terms; The first respondent will take up Ext.P2 immediately . He will conduct an enquiry into Ext.P2 either directly or through a subordinate officer in whom he is having confidence. As part of the enquiry, the officer conducting the enquiry can summon or meet the party respondents. If the enquiry reveals that there is subsisting threat to the lives and limbs of the petitioner and members of her family from respondents 4 to 8, the officer conducting the enquiry will take such steps as is necessary for protecting the lives and limbs of the petitioner and members of his family. If it is revealed that the party respondents are claiming any right over the property, which belongs to the petitioner, then the petitioner should be advised to have recourse to a competent civil court. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K. HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk WPC.No.30674/2011 3