Kerala High Court
Sarika P.J vs State Police Chief on 3 April, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 7138 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
SARIKA P.J
AGED 36 YEARS
D/O.JANARDHANAN, RESIDING AT PULINKANNY HOUSE,
THURUTHY POST, PRALAYAKKAD, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT., PIN - 683546
BY ADVS.
ANJALY T.A
ASWATHY S MENON
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE POLICE CHIEF
STATE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VELLAYAMBALAM P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010
2 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF ERNAKULAM RURAL
DISTRICT HEAD QUARTERS ERNAKULAM RURAL POLICE SOUTH
KALAMASSERY, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN -
682039
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KURUPPAMPADY POLICE STATION KURUPPAMPADY P.O,
PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683545
4* ADDL.R4. ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
PERUMBAVOOR
*(ADDNL.R4 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
23.02.2024 IN W.P(C)NO.7138 OF 2024)
BY ADV ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
SRI PM SHAMEER-GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 7138 OF 2024 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner says that she has certain matrimonial disputes
with her husband, consequent to which, she was constrained to obtain
Ext.P1 protection order from the learned Judicial First Class
Magistrate Court III, Perumbavoor. She alleges that her husband,
however, violated this order, forcing her to file a complaint before the
Police; but that instead of investigating the same, they are now
continuously harassing her. She thus prays that the respondents be
directed not to harass her, but to investigate on the complaint against
her husband and complete necessary action thereon.
2. In response to the afore submissions of Smt.Anjaly T.A. -
learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader -
Sri.P.M.Shameer, submitted that the allegations of the petitioner
against the Police Authorities are wholly untrue and uncharitable
because they were only investigating a complaint preferred by her
against her husband. He added that it is only for the purpose of
recording the statement of the petitioner that the Police Officer visited
her house, which now appears to be misinterpreted by her that she is
being harassed. He thus prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.
3. The afore submissions of the learned Government Pleader
certainly alleys the apprehension of the petitioner fully, if not,
substantially. I am, therefore, of the firm view that this Court will be
justified in recording the same and close this writ petition.
Resultantly, I record the submissions made on behalf of the
respondents by the learned Government Pleader as afore and dispose
of this writ petition on it terms; however, leaving liberty to the
petitioner to approach this Court again in future, if so required.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
MC/3.4
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7138/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY HON'BLE
JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT III,
PERUMBAVOOR IN CMP NO. 102/2024 IN MC NO.
04/2024 DATED 09.02.2024
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER ADDRESSING THE RESPONDENT
SHO, KURUPPAMPADY POLICE STATION DATED
17.02.2024
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT
ISSUED BY KURUPPAMPADY POLICE STATION IN
RESPONSE TO EXHIBIT - P2 COMPLAINT DATED
17.02.2024
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT EMAILED BY
PETITIONER TO THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
ERNAKULAM RURAL DATED 19.02.2024
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT EMAILED BY
PETITIONER TO THE STATE POLICE CHIEF &
DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE DATED
19.02.2024
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION
ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT ADDRESSING THE
PETITIONER DATED 20.02.2024
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL OUTPATIENT CARD
ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER BY
THE TALUK HEAD QUARTERS HOSPITAL,
PERUMBAVOOR DATED 17.02.2024
