Mary John vs Disrict Police Chief
2021 Latest Caselaw 18595 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 17TH BHADRA, 1943
                          WP(C) NO. 28229 OF 2020


PETITIONER:

              MARY JOHN, AGED 55 YEARS, W/O. JOHN,
              KURUVIKATTUKUZHI (H), NEDUMPURA P.O.
              CHERUTHURUTHI, THRISSUR REPRESENTED BY
              POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER K.M. JOHN,
              AGED 65 YEARS, S/O. MATHEW,
              KURUVIKATTUKUZHI (H), NEDUMPURA P.O.
              CHERUTHURUTHI, THRISSUR.

              BY ADV L.RAJESH NARAYAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1         DISRICT POLICE CHIEF
              KALYAN NAGAR, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR 680 003.

    2         SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
              THRISSUR RURAL POLICE, KALYAN NAGAR, AYYANTHOLE,
              THRISSUR 680 003.

    3         SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERUTHURUTHY POLICE
              STATION, CHERUTHURUTHI KERALA 679 531.

    4         MOIDUNNI, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O. MOHAMMED, ARACKAL (H),
              CHALISSERY P.O. KOOTANAD, OTTAPALAM 679 536.

    5         SIDHIQU, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O. UNNIANKUTTY,
              ONGANATUTHODI (H), NEDUMPARA VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY P.O.
              THRISSUR 679 531.

    6         THAMEEM, AGED 42 YEARS, W/O. SIDHIQ,, ONGANATUTHODI (H),
              NEDUMPARA VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY P.O. THRISSUR 679 531.
 WPC 28229/20
                                        2



             BY ADVS.
             SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ
             SRI.K.P.MAJEED
             SRI.E.C.BINEESH - GP


      THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION      ON   08.09.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 28229/20
                                        3



                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

alleging that she is being meted out with constant

harassment and threats by the 5th and 6th

respondents and their men; and asserts that,

therefore, she had no other option but to approach

the 2nd respondent-Superintendent of Police with

Ext.P14 request for Police protection. She alleges

that, however, no action had been taken on Ext.P14

and consequently, that she has been constrained to

approach this Court through this Writ Petition;

and prays that the 2nd respondent be directed to

afford adequate and effective protection to her

life and property from the party respondents and

their associates.

2. I have heard Sri.L.Rajesh Narayan Iyer -

learned counsel for the petitioner and

Sri.E.C.Bineesh - learned Government Pleader WPC 28229/20

appearing on behalf of the official respondents.

3. Even though summons from this Court has

been validly served on respondents 4 to 6, they

have chosen not to be present in person or to be

represented through counsel; thus inferentially

guiding me to the impression that they have no

objection in the reliefs sought for by the

petitioner in this Writ Petition being granted.

4. Sri.E.C.Bineesh - learned Government

Pleader, submitted that there are certain civil

disputes between the petitioner on one side and

respondents 4 to 6 on the other and that it is

evident from Ext.P6 order of the Munsiff Court,

Wadakkanchery, as also Ext.P7 report of the

Advocate Commissioner. He submitted that the

Police have not and do not intend to interfere

with the civil disputes, but that the life and

property of the petitioner will be protected from

any threat, including from respondents 4 to 6.

5. When I hear the learned Government Pleader WPC 28229/20

as afore, it is clear that this Court cannot enter

into the merits of the civil disputes between the

parties, but that the life and property of the

petitioner needs to be adequately protected.

In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ

petition and direct the 3rd respondent to afford

adequate and effective protection to the life and

property of the petitioner, as and when any

complaint is made by her against respondents 4 to

6 with respect to any threat or intimidation or

suspicion or commission of any offence from their

side; in which event, said Authority will make

sure that all such are dealt with swiftly and

quickly.

Sd/-

RR                                     DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
                                            JUDGE
 WPC 28229/20


               APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28229/2020

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1            TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.
                      4068/1/2012 DATED 6.9.2012.

EXHIBIT P2            TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED
                      20.6.2019.

EXHIBIT P3            TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
                      320.11.2019.

EXHIBIT P4            TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO.
                      501/2019 DATED 30.11.2019.

EXHIBIT P5            TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPROT
                      DATED 16.12.2019.

EXHIBIT P6            TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.8.2020

IN I.A. NO. 3008/2019 IN O.S. 501/2019 ON THE FILES OF THE HONBLE MUNSIFF COURT, WADAKKANCHERY.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 6.10.2020.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 6.10..2020.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 2.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 30.10.2020.

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.11.2020 IN I.A. NO. 5/2020.

EXHIBIT P12 FEW PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE WASTE COMMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT.

WPC 28229/20

EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 30.10.2020.

EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.12.20.