IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL MONDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2011 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30921 of 2011(M) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ RATHIKUMARI,W/O.SREEKUMAR,SREE RAGAM, PEPRAYIL,VELLAYANI PO,KALLIYOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KERALA POLICE HEAD QUARTERS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEMOM CIRCLE,PIN 695 001, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEMOM POLICE STATION 695 001,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SASI,S/O.CHANDRAPANI, PERAYIL VELLAYANI,KALLIYUR PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN 695 042. 5. SHYAMALA KUMARI,W/O.SASI,PERAYIL, VELLAYANI,KALLIYUR PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM , PIN 695 042. 6. SREEKALA,W/O.SURESH, PERAYIL,VELLAYANI,KALLIYUR PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 042. 7. SURESH, PERAYIL,VELLAYANI,KALLIYUR PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 042. WP(C).No. 30921 of 2011(M) -2- 8. MANIKANTAN,SARVODHAYAM COLONY, PERAYIL,VELLAYANI,KALLIYUR PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 042. SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.P.SAJID THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30921 of 2011(M) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 29/09/10 ISSUED FROM THE KALLIYUR VILLAGE OFFICE. EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.S. NO.1863/04 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. MUNSIFF, TVPM DATED 21/12/05. EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30/10/10 SUBMITTED BY THE HUSBAND OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.02/11/11. EXT.P5:- TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.30921 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The petitioner, a lady is seeking police protection for her life and for her property. The averments in the Writ Petition says that the petitioner is actually seeking police protection in the matter of completion of the construction of a compound wall around her property and also protection for her life and for the life of her husband. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no subsisting civil dispute between the petitioner and the party respondents in respect of the petitioner's properties. The suit filed by the party respondents was dismissed way back in December, 2005 and Ext.P2 is the judgment. At the moment, no civil dispute or civil litigation is pending. There is no justification for the obstruction of the party respondents in the matter of completing the construction of W. P. C. No.30921 of 2011 -2- the wall and also for their threatening the petitioner and her husband. 2. As directed by us Sri.T.P.Sajid, the learned Senior Government Pleader has taken notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. We have heard him also. 3. Having considered the submissions addressed at the Bar as well as the various materials produced along with the Writ Petition, we are of the view that it is not necessary that we should examine the correctness of the averments in the Writ Petition. We find that Ext.P4 representation has been submitted before the Sub Inspector of Police, the 3rd respondent by the petitioner along with her sister one Subhadra Thankachi. We direct the 3rd respondent to take up Ext.P4 and conduct a thorough enquiry into the same. As part of this enquiry the 3rd respondent can summon or meet all or any of the party respondents. If the enquiry reveals that there is no civil dispute in respect of the property between the parties the 3rd respondent can render protection to the petitioner for completion of the W. P. C. No.30921 of 2011 -3- construction of the compound wall which going by the documents produced is constructed up to foundation level. At any rate, if the enquiry reveals that there is subsisting threat to the life of the petitioner and members of her family the 3rd respondent shall ensure that no danger is caused to the life of the petitioner or members of her family on account of any illegality perpetrated by the party respondents. The petitioner is directed to send a copy of this judgment as soon as she obtains the same by registered post with acknowledgment due to all the party respondents and registration receipt should be produced before the 3rd respondent. Sd/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE Sd/- K. HARILAL JUDGE kns/- //True Copy// P. A. TO JUDGE W. P. C. No.30921 of 2011 -4-