IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL MONDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30213 of 2011(B) ------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------- KOCHURANI SEBASTIAN, AGED 51 YEARS, W/O SONY THOMAS, VAKAYIL HOUSE, SANATHANAPURAM, KAITHAVANA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.E.D.GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA - 688001. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA (POLICE CHIEF, ALAPPUZHA) - 688001 3. STALIN, S/O BHASKARAN, SHEELA BHAVANAM, SANATHANAPURAM P.O. KAITHAVANA, ALAPPUZHA DIST. - 688003. 4. BHASKARAN, SHEELA BHAVANAM, SANATHANAPURAM P.O., KAITHAVANA, ALAPPUZHA DIST. - 688003. WP(C).No. 30213 of 2011(B) -2- 5. MALATHI, W/O BHASKARAN, SHEELA BHAVANAM, SANATHANAPURAM, KAITHAVANA, ALAPPUZHA DIST. - 688003. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30213 of 2011(B) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT.27/07/11 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT.15/08/11. EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT.15/08/11. EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.845/11 REGISTERED BY ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION. EXT.P5:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT AND ROUGH SKETCH FILED IN O.S.518/11 BEFORE MUNSIFF COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.P6:- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.2573/11 IN OS.518/11 PASSED BY ADDL. MUNSIFF COURT, ALAPPUZHA. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.30213 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The petitioner, a lady has filed this Writ Petition seeking police protection for her life as well as for carrying out constructions as permitted by the Additional Munsiff's Court, Alappuzha under Ext.P6 interim order in O.S.518/11. The petitioner's case is that though the learned Munsiff had issued an absolute injunction order in favour of the 5th respondent who was the plaintiff in the suit the order was later modified under Ext.P6. In terms of Ext.P6 the petitioner has been permitted to make constructions on her property leaving a space of 1 metre on the extreme northern boundary of her property. The petitioner's grievance is that due to obstructions of respondents 3 to 5 the petitioner is unable to carry out the construction strictly as permitted under Ext.P6. The petitioner has a further grievance that W. P. C. No.30213 of 2011 -2- there is really threat to the lives and also their peaceful residence in their house situated near to the starting point of the Alappuzha - Changanacherry road. 2. As directed by us Sri.Dhanesh Mathew Manjooran, the learned Government Pleader has taken notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. We have heard him also. 3. Even though Sri.E.D.George, the learned counsel for the petitioner was very persuasive, we are not inclined to grant the protection directions which the petitioner has sought regarding constructions on her the property on the basis of Ext.P6. According to us, such relief is to be sought for and obtained from the learned Additional Munsiff who is in seizin of Ext.P6 suit O.S.518/11. If necessary, the learned Munsiff can appoint a Commissioner for supervision of the construction and can also direct the Station House Officer concerned to grant protection for construction strictly in accordance with Ext.P6. 4. Coming to the protection sought for in respect of the lives of the petitioner and her husband and also their W. P. C. No.30213 of 2011 -3- peaceful residence in their house, we are of the view, that it is too early to blame respondents 1 and 2 police officers of lethargy. According to the petitioner, on account of subsisting threats from the part of respondents 3 to 5, the petitioner and her husband are finding it difficult even to come out of their house. We find that Ext.P4 crime was registered by the police against respondents 3 and 4 on the basis of a complaint submitted by the petitioner. We direct the 1st respondent who is the Circle Inspector of Police having domain over the area where the petitioner resides to keep constant vigil over the petitioner, the party respondents and their places of residence and to ensure by taking requisite steps that the dispute between the petitioner and the party respondents do not give rise to any law and order situation. Whenever complaints are received from the petitioner by the 1st respondent he shall conduct prompt enquiry and action shall be taken on the basis of the facts revealed in such enquiries if necessary for protecting the lives of not only the petitioner, but also the petitioner's W. P. C. No.30213 of 2011 -4- husband. Sd/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE Sd/- K. HARILAL JUDGE kns/- //True Copy// P. A. To Judge