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 25TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 34685 of 2010(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- AKHIL VIJAYAN, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. P.K.VIJAYAN, SREENILAYAM, NEENDOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. ATHIRA, D/O. PURUSHOTHAMAN, KUZHITHARAYIL, MUNDAR, KALLARA P.O.-686 611, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM. 2. PURUSHOTHAMAN, KUZHITHARAYIL, MUNDAR, KALLARA P.O.-686 611, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADUTHURUTHY POLICE STATION, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM-686 604. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADUTHURUTHY CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM – 686 604. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KOTTAYAM-686 001. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. V.K. SUNIL, R3 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K. VIPINDAS, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.34685/2010-I: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT WITH R.2. DTD. 12/11/2010. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 15/11/2010 SENT BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.5. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. K.M.JOSEPH & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C) NO.34685 OF 2010 ============================ Dated this the 25th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT K.M.Joseph, J. The petitioner has approached this court seeking the following:- “i) Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents 3 to 5 to prevent the forceful marriage between the petitioner and 1st respondent on the strength of Ext.P1 agreement which was created under threat between the father of the petitioner and the 2nd respondent in the police station. ii)Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents 3 to 5 to provide adequate and sufficient police protection to the lives of the petitioner and his family members without it being dangered in the hands of 2nd respondent and his men”. Wpc 34685/2010 2 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows. Petitioner is a student aged 21 years and in short he seeks relief that there may not be forceful marriage between the petitioner and first respondent. It is alleged that petitioner and his father were detained and father of the petitioner was made to enter into an agreement vide Ext.P1 under threat in the police station and the petitioner has never loved the girl and he does not want to marry anybody at present. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the party respondents 1 and 2 and learned Government Pleader also. The learned counsel for party respondents would submit that they have settled the matter and they will not compel the petitioner to marry the first respondent and he also submits that they will not threaten the life of the petitioner and they will only take any legal steps as they are advised to take in accordance with law. We record the submission and close the writ petition. K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE lgk