Dismissed

K.N.Yamuna v. the Station House Officer

Kerala HC17 Dec 2019WP(C)/30168/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court made an interim order granting police protection to the petitioner against her son and daughter-in-law absolute, clarifying the order was intended only to ensure the petitioner's safety. The request was formulated after respondents 3 and 4 submitted no grievance existed and feared misuse in other proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Interim order granting police protection to the petitioner against respondents 3 and 4, respondent 1 and 2, is made absolute with a note clarifying its purpose is to ensure safety.

K.N.Yamuna Vs the Station House Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.30168 OF 2019(U)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

K.N.YAMUNA, AGED 80 YEARS, S/O. LATE N. RAMACHANDRAN, HOUSE NO. 123, EVERSHINE CITY, AVANOOR P.O, MUNDOOR, THRISSUR 680 013

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.P.A.HARISH SMT.PREETHI. P.V.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR - 680 545

¶11

2 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERAMANGALAM, THRISSUR – 680 545

¶12

3 SANTHOSH R, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. LATE RAMACHANDRAN, HOUSE NO. 123, EVERSHINE CITY, AVANOOR P.O, MUNDOOR, THRISSUR - 680 013

¶13

4 BINDU SNATHOSH, AGED 47 YEARS,

¶14

W/O. SANTHOSH, HOUSE NO.123, EVERSHINE CITY, AVANOOR P.O, MUNDOOR, THRISSUR 680 013

¶15

5 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR 680 001

¶16

R3-4 BY ADV. SRI.R.ANIL R3-4 BY ADV. SRI.SEBASTIAN PHILIP

¶17

GP- P.P.THAJUDHEEN

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C).No.30168 OF 2019

¶20

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

The petitioner seeks police protection for life and property from respondents 3 and 4, who are none other than her son and daughter-in-law respectively.

¶23

On 8.11.2019, this court passed the following

¶24

interim order in the matter :

¶25

“ Pending disposal of the writ petition, there will be an interim order directing respondents 1 and 2 to afford police protection to the life of the petitioner from respondents 3 and 4.”

¶26

When this matter was taken up today, the learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4 submitted that the interim order is likely to be misused against respondents 3 and 4 in the proceedings instituted by the petitioner against them under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. It was pointed out that otherwise, respondents 3 and 4 have absolutely no grievance against the interim order.

¶27

In the light of the submission made by the learned

¶28

¶29

WP(C).No.30168 OF 2019

¶30

counsel for respondents 3 and 4, the writ petition is closed, making the interim order absolute and clarifying that the interim order is one intended only for ensuring the safety of the petitioner.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

P.B.SURESH KUMAR,

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

mpm

¶35

WP(C).No.30168 OF 2019

¶36

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶39

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT DEED DATED 22-03-2008 EXECUTED BY M/S.JACOB @ AND 6 OTHERS IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED
	16-04-2018 ISSUED BY AVANOOR VILLAGE OFFICER, THRISSUR TALUK.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY ISSUED BY M/S.SUN MEDICAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE, THRISSUR, DATED 31-5-2019
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 05-11-2019.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 05-11-2019 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER, DATED 31-10- 2019 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶40

// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE

K.N.Yamuna v. the Station House Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.N.Yamuna v. the Station House Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ruby Abraham Vs Principal Chief Forest Conservator (F, L and R)

Denish, Vs State of Kerala

Maya Devi Vs the State of Kerala

M/S.Avk Enterprises Vs Suseela K K

Suresh M.R Vs the Principal, Chelakkara Central School

Girish Nayak Vs Ratheesh B