Jayasree vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 25, 2024

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1302265

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1302265
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Basant Balaji
Decided On: Jul 25, 2024
Case Number: WP(C)/28394/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jayasree

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the last seven years. there is no quarrel between the petitioner and the 4th respondent, and the marital relationship still subsists.5. the 4th respondent has produced exts.r4(a) and r4(b)certificates to show that he is ill and was admitted to amrutha institute of medical sciences and research centre, kochi. the 4th respondent wants the petitioner to come and live with him and needs her support. therefore, prayed for the dismissal of the writ petition.6. the writ petition was filed in the year 2021 and whileissuing notice to the respondents, an interim order was passed directing the 3rd respondent to afford adequate and effective police protection to the life and property of the petitioner from the threat and intimidation from respondents 4 and 5.7. counsel for respondents 4 and 5 submits that there is no threat from their side, and the 4th respondent only wants the company of the petitioner.the counsel for the petitioner also submits that she is living in kollam and if there is any threat from respondents 4 and 5 the police shall give adequate protection to the life and property of the petitioner from respondents 4 and 5. since there has been no untoward incident, after the interim order was passed by this court, i deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the police in case of any threat from respondents 4 and 5.the writ petition is disposed of. sd/- basant balaji, judge ss appendix of wp(c) 28394/2021 petitioner exhibits exhibit p1 true copy of the acknowledgment receipt issued by the vanitha cell dated 01.02.2019 exhibit p2 true copy of the complaint before the sho kollam east police, dated 24.11.2021

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1946 W.P.(C) NO.28394 OF 2021 PETITIONERS: JAYASREE, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O. BABU REJENDRA PRASAD, ARUNODHAYAM, THAZHAM, CHATHANOOR, KOLLAM, NOW RESIDING AT SREEKRISHNA MANDIRAM, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM-691 008 BY ADV S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM)
RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001 2 THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM CITY, KOLLAM-691 001 3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 001 4 BABU RAJENDRA PRASAD, S/O. SIVADASAN, ARUNODHAYAM, THAZHAM, CHATHANOOR, KOLLAM-691 572 5 RAJESH BABU, ARUNODHAYAM, THAZHAM, CHATHANOOR, KOLLAM-691 572 BY ADVS. AYYAPPAN SANKAR S.HRIDYA OTHER PRESENT: GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI. RIYAL DEVASSY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

(Dated: 25th July, 2024) This writ petition is filed seeking direction, directing respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate and effective police protection to the life of the petitioner against the threat of violence from respondents 4 and 5.

2. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the 4th

respondent is the husband and the 5th respondent is the son-in-law of the petitioner. The 4th respondent has two auditoriums, quarries, and many buildings at Chathanoor and surrounding places.

3. The allegation of the petitioner is that respondents 4 and

5 are forcing the petitioner to dispose of 149.30 Ares of property and building in Kollam Town obtained by the petitioner as a settlement deed from her mother. The petitioner did not heed their demands, and the life of the petitioner became miserable with the

4th respondent, therefore, she was forced to shift her residence from Chathanoor to Kollam, and at present, she is residing with her mother. Due to continued harassment of the 4th and 5th respondents, the petitioner submitted a petition before the Vanitha Cell, Kollam City on 01.02.2019 (Ext.P1), but the police did not take any action on the complaint, so she filed another complaint before the S.H.O., on 24.11.2021 (Ext.P2). The 3rd respondent has not taken any action regarding the harassment of the respondents, hence, the petitioner has approached this court.

4. A counter affidavit is filed by the 4th respondent, in which

it is averred that he is aged 72 years and had serious cardiac ailments for the last seven years. There is no quarrel between the petitioner and the 4th respondent, and the marital relationship still subsists.

5. The 4th respondent has produced Exts.R4(a) and R4(b)

certificates to show that he is ill and was admitted to Amrutha Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Kochi. The 4th respondent wants the petitioner to come and live with him and needs her support. Therefore, prayed for the dismissal of the writ petition.

6. The writ petition was filed in the year 2021 and while

issuing notice to the respondents, an interim order was passed directing the 3rd respondent to afford adequate and effective police protection to the life and property of the petitioner from the threat and intimidation from respondents 4 and 5.

7. Counsel for respondents 4 and 5 submits that there is no threat from their side, and the 4th respondent only wants the company of the petitioner.

The counsel for the petitioner also submits that she is living in Kollam and if there is any threat from respondents 4 and 5 the police shall give adequate protection to the life and property of the petitioner from respondents 4 and 5. Since there has been no untoward incident, after the interim order was passed by this court, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the police in case of any threat from respondents 4 and 5.

The writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE ss APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28394/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE VANITHA CELL DATED 01.02.2019 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE SHO KOLLAM EAST POLICE, DATED 24.11.2021

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2024 Same Parties Jayasree vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Basant Balaji