IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2011 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 19110 of 2009(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- PARVATHY. K.G., W/O.H.HARISH, HARITHA SREE, KUREEPUZHA, KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.DILEEP P.PILLAI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. S.I. OF POLICE, ANCHALUMMOODU, KOLLAM. 2. C.I. OF POLICE, KUNDARA, KOLLAM. 3. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM. 4. GINISH. C., T.R.A.150, PARVATHY, THEVALLY P.O., KOLLAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISMA, R4 BY ADV. SRI.B.SURESH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.19110 of 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd March, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. This petition is filed by the petitioner, a woman, seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution to respondents 1 to 3 to afford police protection for her against the apprehended illegal, culpable and violent conduct of respondent No.4 who is none other than her brother. This petition was admitted on 8.7.2009. Interim orders were passed directing the police “to see that no untoward incident happens, if there is any threat to the life of the petitioner”. After 8.7.2009, there has been no posting of this case. The Registry has now listed it for hearing and disposal. 2. There is no representation for the petitioner. Respondent No.4 has appeared through counsel. The learned counsel for respondent No.4 submits that all the outstanding disputes between the parties have been settled and a partition deed has been entered into between WPC No.19110/2009 2 the siblings. In these circumstances, the petitioner is evidently not interested in prosecuting this petition and this petition may now be dismissed as unnecessary, submits the learned counsel for the fourth respondent. 3. As indicated earlier, the petitioner is not evidently interested in prosecuting this petition. We accept the submissions of the learned counsel for the fourth respondent. This petition is accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution. R.BASANT JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/