IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL MONDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 31706 of 2011(K) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- ZAKEER HUSSAIN.K.E,AGED 42 YEARS, S/O MOHAMMED,KUNDURUMAL ILLATH VALAPPIL HOUSE, P.O.ERAVAKKAD,VIA.KUMARANALLUR,PALAKKAD-679552. BY ADVS. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,CHALISSERY POLICE STATION,PALAKKAD-679636. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATTAMBI,PALAKKAD-679303. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD-678001. 4. SIDDIQUE,KADATHUVALAPPIL HOUSE, KOLALAMBU,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676522. 5. ABDULLA,PANDARATHIL HOUSE, KOLALAMBU,MALAPPURAM -676522. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ABOOBACKER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 31706/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 24/11/2011. P2: COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25/11/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.HARILAL,JJ ------------------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.31706 of 2011 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Pius C. Kuriakose, J As directed by us the State Attorney has taken notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 and we have heard him also. 2. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that on account of the threat and contumacious acts of party respondents 4 and 5, the petitioner and members of his family are finding it extremely difficult to live peacefully in the petitioner's residence. Having considered the averments in the writ petition and the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and those addressed by the State Attorney, we are of the view that there is no necessity that we examine the truth or otherwise of the various allegations contained in the writ petition against respondents 4 and 5. It is seen that Ext.P1 petition has been submitted by the petitioner before the 1st respondent, local Sub Inspector. 3. We dispose of the writ petition directing the 1st respondent to take up Ext.P1 immediately. The 1st respondent W.P(C) No.31706 of 2011 2 will conduct an enquiry into Ext.P1. As part of the enquiry the 1st respondent can either summon or meet 4th and 5th respondents. The enquiry reveals that there is truth in the allegations levelled by the petitioner in Ext.P1 against 4th and 5th respondents it shall be the obligation of the 1st respondent to take such steps as are necessary for protecting the life and limbs of the petitioner and his family members. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K.HARILAL JUDGE ab