Subaida Abdul Karim vs District Police Chief
2023 Latest Caselaw 3191 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
 THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 2ND CHAITHRA, 1945
                  WP(C) NO. 6566 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
          SUBAIDA ABDUL KARIM,
          VIRALIPURATHU HOUSE,
          MUKUTHALAVADAKKUMURI,
          NANNAMMUKKU P.O,
          MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679575

         BY ADVS.
         K.REEHA KHADER
         ANJALY JIMMICHAN


RESPONDENTS:
    1     DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
          DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF BUILDING,
          FEROKHPALAKKED HIGHWAY-(NH-213), UP HILL,
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676504
    2     CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
          CHANGARAMKULAM POLICE STATION,
          MALAPPURAM-, PIN - 679575
    3     SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
          CHANGARAMKULAM POLICE STATION,
          MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679575
    4     ARUMUGHAN @RAVI
          AGED 50 YEARS
          S/O KUPPAYI PERINCHIRA HOUSE,
          MUTHALAMADA P.O PALAKAD, PIN - 678507
    5     AJITH
          AGED 20 YEARS
          S/O ARUMUGHAN @ RAVI
          PERINCHIRA HOUSE
          MUTHALAMADA P.O
          PALAKAD,, PIN - 678507

         BY ADVS.
         SAJAN VARGHEESE K.
         LIJU. M.P(K/3405/1999)
         JOPHY POTHEN KANDANKARY(K/319/2009)
         E.C.BINEESH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION      (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP     FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.03.2023,     THE COURT ON THE SAME      DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.6566 of 2023
                                  :2 :




                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2023

The petitioner is an aged lady living at

Nannammukku in Malappuram District. The petitioner's family

comprises of her husband, son, daughter-in-law and their

children. Her husband is a chronic cardiac and Asthma

patient. On 26.01.2023 the 4th and 5th respondents attacked

the petitioner and her family. They also abused them with filthy

language. The daughter-in-law of the petitioner had

complained about the incident to the Changaramkulam Police

Station. The police officers convinced her that no more such

incidents would happen and made her to withdraw the

complaint.

2. Later, on 22.02.2023 morning, the 4 th and 5th

respondents along with two other women attacked the WP(C) No.6566 of 2023

petitioner, her husband, son and daughter-in-law. The

daughter-in-law of the petitioner tried to contact the police

officer to inform about this incident. On the same day, she

filed a complaint to the District Police Chief, Malappuram

regarding the incident by e-mail. The police has not taken any

action despite giving complaint.

3. The counsel representing respondents 4 and 5 will

controvert all the allegations made by the petitioner.

According to respondents 4 and 5, nearly about One Crore

rupees is due to respondents 4 and 5 towards dress materials

supplied to the son of the petitioner at Qatar. Respondents 4

and 5 have not harassed or manhandled the petitioner. On

the other hand, it is the petitioner who manhandled the wife

and children of respondents 4 and 5. Complaints were filed in

this regard before the police.

4. Respondents 4 and 5 further submitted that they

are residing in Tirupur in connection with their business

activities and hence there cannot be any physical threat from

respondents 4 and 5 to the petitioner. The writ petition has WP(C) No.6566 of 2023

been filed by the petitioner in order to shirk the monetary

liability of the petitioner's son to discharge debt towards

respondents 4 and 5. The writ petition is therefore liable to be

dismissed.

5. Government Pleader entered appearance and

submitted that complaints were received from the petitioner

and Crime No.186/2023 was registered on 01.03.2023 in

Changaramkulam Police Station in Malappuram District. If

there is any further threat from respondents 4 and 5 and such

threat is brought to the notice of respondents 2 and 3,

appropriate action can be taken.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 and

the learned counsel representing respondents 4 and 5.

7. Going through the pleadings and hearing the

arguments of the parties on either side, it can be seen that

there are some financial disputes between the petitioner's son

and respondents 4 and 5. The petitioner would contend that

the petitioner was threatened by respondents 4 and 5 using WP(C) No.6566 of 2023

filthy and abusive language. Respondents 4 and 5 would

submit that it is the petitioner's family who is causing threat to

the life of respondents 4 and 5. From the submissions made

by the Government Pleader, it is seen that a crime has

already been registered against respondents 4 and 5 on the

basis of a complaint filed by the petitioner and investigation is

going on.

Taking into consideration the entire facts and

circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of

holding that if there is any physical threat from respondents 4

and 5 to the petitioner in future, the petitioner will be at liberty

to bring the matter to the notice of respondents 2 and 3 and in

such case respondents 2 and 3 will act in accordance with

law.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE sss WP(C) No.6566 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6566/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 26.01.2023.

EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF THE SCREENSHOT OF MESSAGE RECEIVED THROUGH SMS.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 22.02.2023.

EXHIBIT P4 EMAIL COMMUNICATION THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF.

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT-R4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY ISSUED IN RESPECT OF RESPONDENT NO.4. EXHIBIT-R4(B) TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO SREEJA ARUMUGHAN.