IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH MAY 2009 / 29TH VAISAKHA 1931 WP(C).No. 13811 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. HIMA VISWAMBHARAN, AGED 23, D/O.VISWAMBHARAN, MOOKKAMBARA HOUSE, THAMARACHAL HOUSE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM PO, PIN-683562, KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. VISWAMBHARAN, AGED 56, S/O.LATE KRISHNANKUTTY, MOOKKAMBARA HOUSE, THAMARACHAL HOUSE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM PO, PIN-683562, KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. BEEBI VISWAMBHARAN, AGED 51, W/O.VISWAMBHARAN, MOOKKAMBARA HOUSE, THAMARACHAL HOUSE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O., PIN-683562, KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.C.ELDHO RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUVA POLICE STATION, ALUVA. 2. MADHUSOODANAN NAIR, AGED 35, S/O.GOPINATHAN NAIR, KALAMBLAYIL HOUSE, KUNJATTUKARA, EDATHALA PO, PIN-683561, ALUVA EAST VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI. A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. GIRI & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 13811 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th May, 2009. JUDGMENT Surendra Mohan, J. The first petitioner is the daughter of the second and third petitioners. She is a graduate and aged 23 years. She is residing with her parents. According to the petitioners, the second respondent enticed the first petitioner by misrepresenting to her that he was a well to do and financially sound person, who wanted to marry her. The first petitioner left the house on 9.4.2007 and she was forced to go through a marriage ceremony at the Pavakulam Sree Mahadeva Temple, Kaloor. Ext.P1 is the certificate of marriage issued by the temple authorities. Thereafter, the first petitioner was taken to Munnar, the second petitioner was coerced into executing Ext.P4 expressing his willingness to give his daughter in marriage to the second respondent and thereafter, the daughter was handed over to him. The first petitioner has filed O.P.683/2009 before the Family Court, Ernakulam for a decree of nullity of her marriage with the second respondent. The second respondent has filed O.P.573/2009 before the same Family Court WPC 13811/2009 2 for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights. The above proceedings are all pending. 2. Meanwhile it is alleged that the second respondent has threatened the petitioners with dire consequences if the petitioner was not given in marriage to the second respondent, as demanded by him. According to the petitioners the second respondent is a person with criminal record and they apprehend danger to their life and person. It is alleged that the second respondent has threatened to chop off the legs of the second petitioner. Because of the threat the second petitioner is even afraid to open his shop. The first petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 complaint before the first respondent and receipt of complaint is evidenced by Ext.P6. The allegation is that no action is taken on the complaint so far. 3. Since the matter is pending consideration of the Family Court, we are not expressing any opinion on the allegations made in this writ petition. However, it is to be noted that Ext.P5 complaint is pending before the first respondent. In the nature of the allegations contained in Ext.P5, we feel that the allegations require investigation by the police authorities and if the allegations are substantiated appropriate action shall be taken by them in the matter, if necessary by registering a claim and booking the culprits. WPC 13811/2009 3 If there is any threat to the life and person of the petitioners, the first respondent shall ensure that the life and person of the petitioners are protected and that any untoward incident or lawlessness is prevented. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. V. GIRI Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: