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 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36449 of 2010(E) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- XAVIER BIJU ALIAS MUHAMMED SHAFI, S/O.THOMAS, THOPPIL VEEDU, VADACHIRA, CHELLANAM, KOCHI-8. BY ADV. SMT.K.GIRIJA RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM-682 031. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATTANCHERY-682 002. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANNAMALY POLICE STATION-682 008. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 661. 5. JAMEELA, D/O.KANAPARAMBIL KHADER, PEZHAKKAPILLIKARA, MULAVOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686 661. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISHMA R5 BY ADV. SMT.SHERLY THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 36449 of 2010(E) PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 6.4.2010 TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 21.6.2010 SIGNED BY BOTH THE PARTIES. EXT.P3.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 19.11.2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.36449 of 2010-E ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 21st day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. The prayers in the writ petition are as follows: “i) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order directing the respondents 1 to 4 to afford necessary and adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner and his family. ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order directing respondents 1 to 4 to register a crime against 5th respondent and her henchmen on the basis of Exhibits P3 complaint.” 2. Petitioner is the husband of the 5th respondent. Allegations are made against the 5th respondent whom the petitioner married and divorced subsequently. The allegation is of threat. 3. Though served there is no appearance for the 5th respondent. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. The writ petition is disposed of directing that if the petitioner complains of any threat to his life from the 5th WPC 36449/2010 -2- respondent before the 4th respondent, the 4th respondent will look into the complaint and if the complaint is found to be genuine, he shall provide protection to the life of the petitioner as and when required as against the 5th respondent. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS