IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2010 / 21ST ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29090 of 2010(I) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------------- T.ASHRAF,AGED 40 YEARS,S/O.ABOOBACKER, THAZHATHETHIL HOUSE,NHANGATTIRI PO,PATTAMBI. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. MOIDUNNI @KUNHUPPA,MALIYEKKAL PO, PERUMANNA,PATTAMBI. 2. RASHEED,S/O.MOIDUNNI @ KUNHIPPA, DO. DO. 3. LATHEEF,S/O.MOIDUNNI @ KUNHIPPA,DO. DO. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,TRITHALA. ADDL.5. RUKKIYA, W/O.T.ASHRAF,\ MALIYEKKAL, POST PERUMANNA, PATTAMBI. (The additional 5th respondent is impleaded as per order on I.A.No.14313 dated 13.10.2010) R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI SRI.R.SREEHARI R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.RANI DIOTHIMA R5 BY ADV. SRI.R.SREEHARI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.29090 OF 2010: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBTS: EXT.R4A.PHOTOCOPY OF ADMISSION REGISTER OF GLP SCHOOL, PERUMANNUR. EXT.R4B. PHOTOCOPY OF ADMISSION REGISTER OF AUPS NHANGATTUR. EXT.R4C. PHOTOCOPY OF ADMISSION REGISTER OF SENIOR BASIC SCHOOL, THENEERODE. K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.29090 of 2010-I ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 13th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief: “i. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 4th respondent to give adequate and meaningful protection to the life of the petitioner.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner married the daughter of the Ist respondent and sister of respondents 2 and 3 (subsequently impleaded as the additional 5th respondent). The petitioner and his wife are residing separately as suggested by the mediators as the mediation for a happy family life failed. In short, the allegation is that respondents 1 to 3 threatened the petitioner. Petitioner filed complaint. 3. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 denying the allegations. It is inter alia stated that since the attitude of the petitioner towards the daughter of the deponent and children was very cruel there is WPC No.29090/2010 -2- no question of restitution of conjugal rights. At any rate, the allegation of threat is specifically denied. 4. We heard the learned counsel for the parties. We are not going into the allegations or pronouncing on the merits of the matter. But, we record the submission of the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3 that respondents 1 to 3 have no intention to cause any threat to the petitioner's life. If there is any threat by respondents 1 to 3 and it is brought to the notice of the 4th respondent by the petitioner, the 4th respondent will look into the same, and, if the complaint is found to be genuine, he shall afford protection to the life of the petitioner as against respondents 1 to 3. We make it clear that, if the matter comes before any Court/forum in a lis between the parties, that Court/forum is free to decide the same untrammeled by anything contained in this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS