IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2010 / 1ST ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 14878 of 2010(H) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- BHAVANIYAMMA, WIDOW OF VELAPPAN NAIR, AGED 72, RETD. TEACHER, THANNIYKKAL PULIYAPPILIL HOUSE, KALLOORKADU KARA, KALLOORKADU VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.G.SARATHKUMAR SRI.S.RAJKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALLOORKADU POLICE STATION, KALLOORKADU, MUVATTUPUZHA. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MUVATTUPUZHA. 3. NISHA, D/O. SIVARAMAN PILLAI, AGED 35, KAYANATTU KUNNEL HOUSE, ENANELLOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. 4. DILEEP, S/O. SIVARAMAN PILLAI, AGED 32, KAYANATTU KUNNEL HOUSE, ENAMELLOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. 5. SIVARAMAN PILLAI, S/O. NOT KNOWN, AGED 65,KAYANATTU KUNNEL HOUSE,ENANELLOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. R3 TO R5 BY ADV. SRI.K.R.KURUP SRI.C.R.VINOD KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.14878 OF 2010-H PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED NO. 634/2010 DATED 22.4.2010 OF KALLOORKADU SRO. EXT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 12.1.2O10 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3.TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.3.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4.TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.5.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R3A.TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.42/10 OF KALLOORKADU POLICE STATION DATED 16.3.2010. EXT.R3B.PHOTOCOPY OF DOCUMENT NO.1120/09 OF SRO KALLOORKADU, DATED 26.12.2009. EXT.R3C.TRUE COPY OF STAY PASS ISSUED FROM THQ HOSPITAL MUVATTUPUZHA, DATED 17.12.2009. EXT.R3D.TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED BY THE SUBORDINATE OF THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 17.12.2009. EXT.R3E.PETITION FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT UNDER DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, DATED 19.5.2010. EXT.R3F.ORDER IN CMP 595/2010 DATED 18.5.2010. K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.14878 of 2010-H ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 23rd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner is the mother-in-law of the 3rd respondent. The 4th respondent is the brother of the 3rd respondent. The 5th respondent is the father of the 3rd respondent. 2. The prayer in the writ petition is as follows: “To issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ or direction or order directing the Ist and 2nd respondents to afford necessary police protection to the life and property of petitioner.” 3. We heard the learned counsel for the parties. A counter affidavit is filed by the 3rd respondent. In the counter affidavit it is brought out that the 3rd respondent, the daughter-in-law of the petitioner has obtained an order of protection for residence in the property under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. It is also brought out in the counter affidavit that the petitioner is alleged to have attacked the 3rd respondent consequent upon which the 3rd respondent had to be hospitalized. This is the case of the respondents. Of course, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner only wants to have a peaceful life in her house. Learned counsel for the petitioner WPC No.14878/2010 -2- submits that the property belongs to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for respondents 3 to 5 would submit that respondents 3 to 5 have absolutely no intention to cause any threat to the life of the petitioner. We record the said submission. We also direct that, in case, contrary to the submission made on behalf of respondents 3 to 5, the petitioner alleges of any threat by respondents 3 to 5 and it is brought to the notice of the Ist respondent, the Ist respondent shall look into the complaint, and, if it is found to be genuine, he shall take adequate steps for protecting the life of the petitioner as against respondents 3 to 5 or such of them as are found threatening the petitioner. We also make it clear that, if the matter comes before any Court/forum in a lis between the parties, that Court/forum shall decide the matter untrammelled by anything contained in this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS