Petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing police to provide protection against threats by their son. The Court disposed of the petition in terms of an earlier interim order granting police protection.
Disposed of in terms of interim order directing police to provide protection to petitioners.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/6TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935
WP(C).No. 4078 of 2013 (H)
PETITIONER(S):
1. MARTIN GEORGE, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.E.D.GEORGE, EARURIKAL HOUSE, KIZHAKANCHERY AMSOM DESOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT 678 684.
2. LEENA.V.D., W/O.MARTIN GEORGE, EARURIKAL HOUSE, KIZHAKANCHERY AMSOM DESOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT 678 684.
BY ADVS.SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADAKKENCHERY POLICE STATION, ALATUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT 679 001.
3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADAKENCHERY POLICE STATION, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT 679 001.
4. E.D.GEORGE,
R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.MOHAMMED SHAH
R4 BY ADVS. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN
SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR SRI.K.JAGADEESH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Kss
WPC.NO.4078/2013 (H)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT BEARING NO.2550/09 OF THE NENMARA SRO DATED 17/8/2009.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONERS ISSUED BY THE VADAKKENCHERY VILAGE OFFICE DATED 23/4/2012.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX REMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 23/4/2012.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTRICITY BILL RAISED IN THE NAME OF THE FIRST PETITIONER DATED 24/5/2012.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS NO.159/11 DATED 11/10/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, ALATHUR IN PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE FIRST PETITIONER DATED 22/10/2012 BEFORE THE DGP , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION RECEIVED BY THE FIRST PETITINOER DATED NIL.
EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 6/2/2013 BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 5/2/2013.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
Kss
S.SIRI JAGAN & K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ.
W.P.(C). No. 4078 of 2013
Dated this the 27th day of November, 2013
J U D G M E N T
S. Siri Jagan, J
The petitioners are man and wife. The 4th respondent is the son of the first petitioner. The petitioners have three children. The petitioners are living with their children in the address given in the writ petition. According to the petitioners, the 4th respondent is threatening the peaceful living of the petitioners and their children in their house. Although, the petitioners sought police help to ward off the threat, the police did not oblige. That is why the petitioners have filed this writ petition, seeking the following reliefs:
i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents 2 and 3 to provide adequate and sufficient police protection against the threat raised by the 4th respondent to the life of the petitioners, in the interest of justice.
ii) To pass any such or further orders as the petitioner may seek and this Hon'ble Court deem fit to grant.
2. In the writ petition, the petitioners sought
the following interim relief as well.
“For the reasons stated in the writ petition and the accompanying affidavit it is most humbly prayed that this
M.A.C.A.No. 4078 of 2013
2
Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an interim direction affording police protection to the life of the petitioners, by commanding the respondents 2 and 3 herein to protect the life of the petitioners against threat raised by the 4th respondent herein pending consideration of the above writ petition, in the interest of justice”.
3. On 19.11.2013, we passed the following
interim order:
“This writ petition was admitted on 12.2.2013. With great difficulty, the orders of this Court were served on the 4th respondent. Ultimately, he had entered appearance also. But he has not yet filed any counter affidavit in this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioners presses for an interim order. The interim order is only for protection to the life of the petitioners against the threat raised by the 4th respondent.
Post on next week”.
submits that, although the 4th respondent has not filed any counter affidavit, he has no intention whatsoever to cause any threat to the petitioners or their lives. It is submitted by the counsel for the 4th respondent that, the 4th respondent is residing in a portion of the house where the petitioners are residing and the attempt of the
M.A.C.A.No. 4078 of 2013
3
petitioners is to evict the 4th respondent from the house.
that the writ petition can be disposed of in terms of the interim order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the interim order.
Sd/-
S. Siri Jagan, Judge
Sd/-
K. Ramakrishnan, Judge
// True Copy //
P.A. to Judge
ss
1 issue framed by the court
Whether police protection should be afforded to the petitioners against threats by the 4th respondent.
Martin George & Leena V.D.
The State of Kerala
Sub Inspector of Police, Vadakenchery
Circle Inspector of Police, Vadakenchery
E.D. George
S. Siri Jagan
K. Ramakrishnan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
