Dismissed

Mrs. Padmaja Nair v. 1. the Commissioner of Police

Kerala HC5 Jul 2023WP(C)/921/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, an elderly woman sought police protection alleging harassment by the fourth respondent. The High Court observed that the apprehension was baseless and directed the parties to approach local police for action if any threat to life materializes, ultimately dismissing the substantive claim for proactive protection.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of without issuing a writ of mandamus for proactive protection. Parties are directed to approach the police if a threat to life materializes.

Mrs. Padmaja Nair Vs 1. the Commissioner of Police — Domestic Violence | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 14TH ASHADHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 921 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

MRS. PADMAJA NAIR
AGED 77 YEARS
T.C. 9/399, SOORYA GARDENS, SASTHAMANGALAM
TRIVANDRUM - 695 010, PIN - 695010
BY ADV SHERLY MOL THOMAS

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE POLICE GROUND, C.V. RAMAN PILLAI RD, THYCAUD, TIRUVANTHAPURAM - 695 014, PIN - 695014

¶9

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER SASTHAMANGALAM, PEROORKADA ROAD DEVAPALAN NAGAR, THIRUVANATHAPURM -695013, PIN - 695013

¶10

3 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE STATE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VELLAYAMBALAM,THIRUVANTHAPURAM - 695010

¶11

4 AJITH KUMAR K E-10 , CHITTADETH HOUSE INDIAN EXPRESS LANE SASTHAMANGALM TRIVANDRUM -695010

¶12

ADDL.R5KRISHNARAJ RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI
AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. LATE RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI R.
HOUSE NO.15. SECRETARY,
SOORYA GARDENS RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION,
SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010
 IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R5 AS PER ORDER DATED
05.07.2023 IN IA 1/2023.
BY ADVS.SMT. VIDYA KURIYAKOSE- GP
R.V. Sreejith
sasthamangalam S. Ajithkumar
G.MAHESWARY(K/1688/2001)
T.RINI(K/1194/2000)
HARIGOVIND S.NAIR(K/933/2022)

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 05.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C).No.921/2023

¶15

¶16

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶17

W.P.(C).No.921 of 2023

¶18

---------------------------------------------Dated this the 05^th day of July, 2023

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

¶21

i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order directing the respondent 1 to 3 to afford necessary and adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner.

¶22

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order directing respondents 1 to 3 to afford necessary and adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner whenever require and stop respondent no.4 against following her.

¶23

iii. Pass any other writ, direction or order that may be prayed for and deemed fit to grant in the circumstances of the case.

¶24

iv. Any other reliefs also may be granted in order to meet out justice considering the circumstances this case.

¶25

WP(C).No.921/2023

¶26

¶27

The main prayer in this writ petition is to issue appropriate direction to respondents 1 to 3 to afford necessary and adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner. It is alleged that there is continuous harassment from the 4^th respondent towards the petitioner. Hence this writ petition.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. I also heard the learned counsel for the 4^th respondent and the learned counsel for the 5^th respondent.

¶29

The counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions raised in the writ petition. The counsel submitted that there is serious threat from the 4^th respondent. The 4^th respondent is continuously following the petitioner and sending vulgar messages to the petitioner. Therefore the petitioner who is aged 77 years is facing serious problem from the 4^th respondent.

¶30

The counsel for the 4^th respondent submitted that this is a false case filed by the petitioner with false allegation. The counsel takes me through Ext.P3 complaint in which vide allegations are made without any basis. The counsel also

¶31

WP(C).No.921/2023

¶32

¶33

submitted that the petitioner is the accused in a criminal case and actually there is threat from the petitioner towards the 4^th respondent.

¶34

The Government Pleader, after getting instructions, submitted that the apprehension of the petitioner is baseless. The Government Pleader also submitted that there no threat from the 4^th respondent to the petitioner and if there is any threat to the life of the petitioner, Police will do the needful. The Government Pleader also submitted that the Police is doing surveillance in that area. In the light of the above submission, nothing survives in this case. If there is any threat to the life of the petitioner, the petitioner is free to approach the 2^nd respondent and the 2^nd respondent will do the needful in accordance with law and see that there is no grievance to the petitioner.

¶35

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:

¶36

If there is any threat to the life of the petitioner

¶37

or the 4^th respondent, both of them are free to approach the 2^nd respondent with appropriate petition and if such a petition is received, the 2^nd

¶38

WP(C).No.921/2023

¶39

¶40

respondent will do the needful to see that there

¶41

is no threat to the life of the petitioner and the

¶42

4^th respondent.

¶43

sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

WP(C).No.921/2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 921/2023

¶48

`PETITIO`	`NER EXH`	`IBITS`
`Exhibit`	`P1`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `DATED 6/10/2022` `RESPONDENT`	`THE POLICE COMPLAINT` `FILED BEFORE THE 2ND`
`Exhibit`	`P2`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `07.10.2022 ISSU` `RESPONDENT`	`ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED` `ED BY THE 2ND`
`Exhibit`	`P3`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `THE CHIEF MINIS`	`THE COMPLAINT FILED TO` `TER DATED 24/11/2022`
`Exhibit`	`P4`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `ISSUED TO PETIT` `HEAD QUARTERS,` `30.04.2022`	`ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT` `IONER FROM THE POLICE` `TRIVANDRUM DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P5`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `RECEIPT ISSUED` `3RD RESPONDENT` `PETITION BY THE` `19/07/2022`	`ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF` `TO THE PETITIONER BY` `AGAINST FILING OF THE` `PETITIONER DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P6`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `RECEIPT ISSUED` `3RD RESPONDENT` `PETITION BY THE` `05.09.2022`	`ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF` `TO THE PETITIONER BY` `AGAINST FILING OF THE` `PETITIONER DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P7`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `RECEIPT ISSUED` `3RD RESPONDENT` `PETITION BY THE` `24.11.2022`	`ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF` `TO THE PETITIONER BY` `AGAINST FILING OF THE` `PETITIONER DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P8`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `DATED 09.12.202` `PETITIONER FROM` `OFFICE AGAINST`	`ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT` `2 ISSUED TO THE` `1ST RESPONDENT'S` `FILING OF A PETITION`

Mrs. Padmaja Nair v. 1. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Padmaja Nair v. 1. the Commissioner of Police

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

M/S. Creative Builders, Vs Controller of Defence Accounts

D. Manoharan Vs Kerala Water Authority

D.Manoharan, Vs Kerala Water Authority

Suresh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Shibin K Vs State of Kerala

Bindhu. S Vs the Superintendent of Police