IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2011 / 9TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 15529 of 2011(M) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- THAJUNISA , W/O.ABDUL MANAF, JASEENA MANZIL, KURIYODU PO, CHADAYAMANGALAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL) OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT PIN 691 001. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 534. 3. THE S I OF POLICE, CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 534. 4. SHAJAHAN @ M.N.SHAJI, S/O. ABDUL MAJEED, C.P.X/284, EDAVILA VEEDU, KURIYODU PO, CHADAYAMANGALAM,KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 534. 5. SHANIFA. W/O. SHAJAHAN, C.P.X/284, EDAVILA VEEDU, KURIYODU PO, CHADAYAMANGALAM KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 534. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. C.M.CHARISMA R4 & R5 BY ADV. SRI.P.S.PRADEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.15529/2011 M APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE FIR NO.413/07 DTD. 04/12/2007. P2: COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN FIR NO.413/07 DTD. 30/12/07. P3: COPY OF THE FIR NO.402/08 DT.D. 14/07/2008. P4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DTD. 27/09/2009. P5: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 03/06/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R4(A): COPY OF COMPLAINT DTD. 23/06/2009 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION. R4(B): COPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 28/06/2009 BEFORE THE CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION. R4(C): COPY OF PETITION DTD. 7/10/2009 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM. R4(D): COPY OF ACCIDENT REGISTER - CUM - WOUND CERTIFICATE DTD. 28/11/2009. R4(E): COPY OF REFER CHARGE DTD. 23/12/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE. R4(F): COPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE JFCM II, KOTTARAKKARA DTD. 2/06/2011. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ........................................... W.P.(C).NO.15529 OF 2011 ............................................. Dated this the 30th day of June, 2011. JUDGMENT Basant, J: The petitioner, a woman, has come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution to respondents 1 to 3 to afford protection for the petitioner and her family members from culpable, violent and contumacious conduct apprehended from respondents 4 and 5. 2. According to the petitioner, she along with her husband and children are residing together in a house adjacent to the house of respondents 4 and 5. Respondents 4 and 5 are spouses. It is the case of the petitioner that respondents 4 and 5 are unnecessarily indulging in contumacious, culpable and violent acts. Peaceful residence of the petitioner and family has become impossible because of such conduct of respondents 4 and 5. Several complaints have been filed. Two crimes have been registered. In spite of these, respondents 4 and 5 are continuing with the contumacious conduct. It is in these : 2 : W.P.(C).NO.15529 OF 2011 circumstances that police protection is claimed. 3. Respondents 4 and 5 have entered appearance through counsel. Counter affidavit has been filed. All allegations are denied. It is admitted that there is a strained relationship between the neighbours. But it is absolutely incorrect to say that respondents 4 and 5 are indulging in contumacious or violent conduct. The boot is actually on the other leg. It is the petitioner and her relatives who are guilty of improper conduct. Respondents 4 and 5 are being harassed by the petitioner. The undertaking of respondents 4 and 5 may be accepted that they shall not indulge in contumacious or culpable conduct. No direction under Article 226 may be issued. The petitioner is likely to misuse such an order if she were permitted to arm herself with such an order. 4. We turned to the learned Government Pleader for submissions. The learned Government Pleader submits that in the perception of the police officials there is no threat to the life or person of the petitioner and members of her family. It is true that there are a number of disputes between the neighbours. They have been warned against involvement : 3 : W.P.(C).NO.15529 OF 2011 in any culpable or violent acts. The police do not now apprehend any threat to the law and order situation or threat of harm to the life or person of the petitioner and her relatives. If there be any such conduct on the part of respondents 4 and 5, the petitioner can complain to the police and such complaint, if genuine, shall be effectively responded to. No directions under Article 226 are necessary, submits the learned Government Pleader also. 5. We have considered all the relevant inputs. We accept the submission of the learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5. We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. We have recorded and accepted the submission/undertaking. We are satisfied that no directions are necessary. 6. This petition is accordingly dismissed with the above observations. Sd/= R. BASANT, JUDGE. Sd/= K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE. cl