IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 34992 of 2007(N) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. V.M.ABRAHAM, VALEL KIZHAKKETHIL VEEDU, KOIPURAM P.O., KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. ANNAMMA ABRAHAM, VALEL KIZHAKKETHIL VEEDU, KOIPURAM P.O., KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOZHENCHERRY. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOIPURAM. 4. BABU DANIEL, KANJIRAMTHARA VADAKATHAYIL VEED, KOIPURAM VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.S.HARIKRISHNAN GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.A.SALIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 34992/2007 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The W.P.(C) is dismissed for default. 14.01.2008. SD/- K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. SD/- P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 34992 OF 2007-N ----------------------------------------- Dated 2nd July, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioners are husband and wife. The 4th respondent is residing in their neighbourhood. The petitioners purchased the shares of the 4th respondent's paternal uncle in his family property. The same infuriated the 4th respondent and he abused and threatened the petitioners, who are aged and infirm. On one occasion in 2006, the 4th respondent trespassed into their house, abused them and caused damages to the articles in the house. So, on the information lodged by the 2nd petitioner, a crime was registered against the said respondent. Ext.P1 is the FIR in that crime. While so, the 4th respondent was convicted in a criminal case and when he was released on parole, he again started threatening the petitioners. So, they preferred Exts.P2 and P3 representations before the police officers and thereafter, this writ petition was filed, seeking the following relief: “(a) To issue a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to WPC 34992/07 2 render adequate protection to the life of the petitioners.” 2. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit, denying all the allegations against him. According to him, he is the victim of the attack by the 1st petitioner and his son. The son of the petitioners is married to the cousin sister of the said respondent. On 18.7.2007, the 1st petitioner and his son obstructed the 4th respondent in front of his house and poured acid on his face and as a result, he lost his left eye. A crime has been registered against the 1st petitioner and his son in connection with the said incident. Ext.R4(a) is the FIR in that crime. It is also submitted that his conviction in the criminal case mentioned by the petitioners no longer survives. In appeal, the Sessions Court set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on him. The 4th respondent has also submitted that he has no intention, whatsoever, to harass or physically harm the petitioners. This submission is recorded and the Writ Petition is disposed of. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. Nm/