IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE MONDAY, THE27H DAY OF JANUARY20147TH MAGHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 2402 of 2014 (A) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JAMES THOMAS EDAYANJILIL @ E.T.JAMES AGED63YEARS RESIDING AT POOZHIKKAL HOUSE, MARIYATHURUTHU P.O. CHUNGAM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS.SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD SRI.C.JOSEPH JOHNY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF KOTTAYAM, COLLECTORATE P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 001.
2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE COLLECTORATE P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 001.
3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE EAST POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM-686 001.
4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE GANGHI NAGAR POLICE STATION, NEAR MEDICAL COLLEGE KOTTAYAM-686 001.
5. SMT. ANITHA JOSEPH , AGED41YEARS D/O. JOSEPH, NOW RESIDING AT PUNNAVILA HOUSE NEAR OLE CERAMICS AND ANGANVADY, KUNDARA P.O. KOLLAM-691 501.
6. SRI. JOSEPH , AGED70YEARS FATHER OF ANITHA JOSEPH, RESIDING AT PUNNAVILA HOUSE NEAR OLE CERAMICS AND ANGANVADY, KUNDARA P.O. KOLLAM-691 501.
7. SRI. ANTONY , AGED40YEARS RESIDING AT PUNNAVILA HOUSE NEAR OLD CERAMICS AND ANGANVADY, KUNDARA P.O. KOLLAM-691 501. BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SAJITH MATHEW JOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2701-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 2402 of 2014 (A) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------ P1 : COPY OF THE CASE RECORDS ISSUED FROM DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM DTD.13.1.2014. P2 : COPY OF THE OUTPATIENT TICKET ISSUED FROM MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM. P3 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD.16.1.2014 BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.1. P4 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD.16.1.2014 BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.2. P5 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD.16.1.2014 BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.3. P6 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD.16.1.2014 BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.4. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------ NIL [True copy] P.S to Judge. Manjula Chellur, C.J.
& A.M. Shaffique, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 2402 of 2014 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 27th day of January, 2014.
JUDGMENT
Shaffique, J.
The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 4 to give adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, on 13.1.2014, at about 9.00 p.m., respondents 5 and 6 along with certain other persons trespassed into his property and he was manhandled. Though a complaint was filed before the police, no action was taken in the matter.
2. This Court had called for instructions through the learned Government Pleader. On instructions, the learned Government Pleader submits that there are several disputes between the petitioner and the 5th respondent, who is the wife of the petitioner in respect of matrimonial issues. The 5th respondent has also filed a complaint under Section 498A of the I.P.C. against her husband, the petitioner herein. The petitioner had raised certain complaints. On enquiry by the police, it was found that the alleged incidents happened in the matrimonial house where the petitioner is residing. The petitioner asked one Philip to reside in the said building. According to the petitioner, Philip is an employee of the petitioner. But, according to the version of the police, Philip is the stooge of the petitioner and at the time when the W.P(C) No. 2402 of 2014 -:
2. :- police visited the premises, he was in a drunken stage. Though the petitioner had raised certain allegations of being manhandled, the police did not find any offence being committed against the petitioner and therefore no crime has been registered so far.
3. Having regard to these factual issues, it is evident that there are substantial disputes between the parties. A case is pending against the petitioner for harassing the 5th respondent and a crime had been registered under Section 498A. The petitioner also has filed a case for divorce. The 5th th respondent has also sought for reliefs under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act. These being the factual situation, a direction as sought for cannot be issued to the detriment of the 5th respondent. That apart, the instructions received through the police would indicate that neither the 5th respondent nor any other respondents were responsible for any crime as alleged by the petitioner.
4. Under these circumstances, we do not think that the direction as sought for by the petitioner can be granted. However, if any cognizable offence is brought to the notice of the police, the police shall conduct necessary enquiry into the matter and appropriate steps shall be taken in that regard. It is needless to W.P(C) No. 2402 of 2014 -:
3. :- state that if the police is not registering any case on the basis of the complaint raised by the petitioner, it will be open to the petitioner to move the Magistrate's Court for appropriate reliefs by filing a private complaint. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice. Sd/- A.M. Shaffique, Judge. Tds/