IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL THURSDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2011 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 33528 of 2011(M) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K. KAUSALYA, SOBHANAMANDIRAM, POOVATTOOR EAST, KALAYAPURAM, KOTTARAKARA. BY ADVS. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) SRI.A.R.DILEEP SMT.NAVA VARGHESE SRI.MANU SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT IN THE DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (RURAL), KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 506. 3. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKARA CIRCLE, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 506. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUTHOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 670 692. 5. SANTHA, AJESH BHAVAN, POOVATTOOR EAST, KALAYAPURAM P.O., KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 506. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S . ABDUL SALAM (SENIOR) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VPV WPCNO.33528/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF FINAL DECREE DATED 15.06.2005 PASSED IN I.A.NO. 470/03 IN OS NO.556/99 OF THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOTTARAKARA. EXT.P2: COPY OF FIR NO. 697/11 DATED 11.07.2011 OF PUTHOOR POLICE STATION. EXT.P3: PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE EXTENSIVE DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE HOUSE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 02.12.2011 ALONG WITH POSTAL RECEIPTS. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE VPV PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C) NO. 33528 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioner, an octogenarian widow, has filed this writ petition seeking protection for her life and also for her peaceful residence in her place of residence- a house allotted to her younger son, who is presently not in station, from the 5th respondent. The 5th respondent is the petitioner's own daughter-in-law being the wife of her elder son. The petitioner submits that she was residing along with her elder son and the 5th respondent in the house which had been allotted to the elder son in the family partition. But, elder son passed away. After the death of the elder son of the petitioner, what the 5th respondent did was to chuck the petitioner, the mother- in law, out of the house. The petitioner had to seek shelter in her younger son's house. The petitioner thereafter filed a suit for partition claiming share in the common property and that suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner. This decree was to the chagrin to the 5th respondent. Ever since the decree was passed, the 5th respondent started giving trouble to the W.P.(C) No. 33528 /2011 2 petitioner. On one occasion, she came to the petitioner's present residential house and destroyed the flooring tiles which had been laid in the front yard of that house. The police were informed and they registered Ext.P2 FIR. But, even thereafter threats and other contumacious acts are continuing from the part of the 5th respondent against the petitioner. According to the petitioner, though the police registered Ext.P2 FIR on the basis of a previous complaint of late the 4th respondent's attitude has become lethargic. Hence, this writ petition for police protection for lives and limbs and for peaceful residence of the petitioner in the younger son's residence. 2. On this writ petition coming up for admission, Sri.S.Abdul Salam learned senior Government Pleader has taken notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 and we have heard him also. 3. Having considered the submissions of Sri.George Varghese Perumpallikuttiyil learned counsel for the petitioner and those of Sri.Abdul Salam learned senior Government Pleader and having gone through the averments in the writ petition and the various materials placed on record, particularly Ext.P2 FIR W.P.(C) No. 33528 /2011 3 and Ext.P3 photographs, we are of the view that it is not necessary that we take a decision as to the correctness of the allegations of the petitioner. We will only observe that prima facie it appears that the petitioner has a grievance. We dispose of this writ petition in the following terms; The 4th respondent - Sub Inspector of Police is directed to take up Ext.P4 immediately and to conduct enquiry. As part of the enquiry, the 4th respondent will summon or meet the 5th respondent. The statement of the 5th respondent will be recorded in the presence of the Civil police officer(women). If the enquiry reveals that there is truth in the allegations of the petitioner contained in Ext.P4, the 4th respondent will take such steps as are necessary for protecting the life and limbs of the petitioner and also the petitioner's peaceful residence in her present place of residence i.e. the house of her younger son. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K.HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk W.P.(C) No. 33528 /2011 4