IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2011 / 4TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 19489 of 2011(I) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SARASAMMA, W/O.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP, SARASWATHY VILASOM, KUNNAM MURI, THAZHAKKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VINOD J.DEV SRI.PRAMOD J.DEV RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 688 001 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKKARA ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 690 101. 4. KRISHNANKUTTY, THEKKEDATHU HOUSE, KUNNAM MURI, THAZHAKKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 690 101. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. CHARISMA R4 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) SRI.A.R.DILEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.19489/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11/07/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.19489 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. Petitioner is a resident of Thazhakkara Village in Mavelikkara Taluk. This writ petition is filed seeking directions to the 3rd respondent to give adequate protection to the life of the petitioner and her family members, from the alleged atrocities and threat caused by the 4th respondent, who is the neighbouring resident. In a complaint submitted by the petitioner (Ext.P1) before the 3rd respondent it is alleged that, the 4th respondent is abusing filthy language and that he had shown cruelty to the dog and cow of the petitioner. It is the complaint that, inspite of submitting Ext.P1 before the 3rd respondent, no effective steps has been taken. Allegation is that the 4th respondent is creating constant threat to the life and person of the petitioner as well as to her family members. 2. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 4th respondent all the allegations were stoutly refuted. It is 2 W.P.(C) No.19489 of 2011 contended that the petitioner is causing hindrance to the usage of a path way leading to the residence of the 4th respondent. It is the complaint that the path way, which is being obstructed by the petitioner, is the only access to the panchayat road for the 4th respondent and many other neighbouring residents. It is also contended that the 4th respondent had attempted to cut off the branches of a tree hanging to the path way and the petitioner abused the 4th respondent and others on that respect. Ext.R4(a) is the copy of a complaint alleged to have been submitted before the 2nd respondent by the neighbouring residents. However, it is conceded that the 4th respondent is not causing any threat to the life of the petitioner or her family members. 3. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 submitted on the basis of instructions received from the 3rd respondent that, there exist a dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent with respect to usage of the path way and complaints were received from either side. However, it is mentioned that there occurred some wordily altercations with respect to the dispute. 4. Under the above mentioned circumstances, we are of 3 W.P.(C) No.19489 of 2011 the opinion that the parties are at liberty to work out remedies regarding the dispute pertaining to usage of the path way, by approaching the competent civil court. However, the 3rd respondent is directed to keep a vigil on the area in order to ensure that no law and order situation is arising out of the dispute. If any information is received with respect to threat to the life caused on the petitioner or her family members or to the 4th respondent, the 3rd respondent shall take appropriate steps in order to avert any criminal offence or breach of peace. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE ami/