Sindhu P.T. v. Sub Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/6TH KARTHIKA, 1937 WP(C).No. 31288 of 2015 (I) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S) :- -----------------
1. SINDHU P.T., AGED 39 YEARS D/O.TANKAPPAN, PANAKKAPADATHU HOUSE, MARADU COCHIN-682 304.
2. VINAYAN, AGED 37 YEARS S/O.TANKAPPAN, PANAKKAPADATHU HOUSE, MARADU COCHIN-682 304.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAMESH(VAIKOM) SMT.KAVYA P.PRASAD RESPONDENT(S) :- -----------------
1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE (STATION HOUSE OFFICER) MARADU POLICE STATION, MARADU, COCHIN-682 304.
2. JANAKI, AGED 62 YEARS W/O.TANKAPPAN, PANAKKAPADATHU HOUSE, MARADU COCHIN-682 304.
3. MR.PRATHAPAN P.T, AGED 34 YEARS S/O.TANKAPPAN, PANAKKAPADATHU HOUSE, MARADU COCHIN-682 304.
R1 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
jvt
WP(C).No. 31288 of 2015 (I) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :- --------------------------- EXT.P1- A TRUE COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE DATED 27.09.12 AND TRANSLATION.
EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BY 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 08.10.2015.
EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND TRANSLATION.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :- NIL -------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J & A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
--------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.31288 of 2015 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October 2015
J U D G M E N T
Shaffique, J.
The petitioners have approached this Court alleging that respondents 2 and 3 are threatening the petitioners and attempts were being made to forcibly evict the petitioners from their property. It is alleged that the petitioners were also manhandled and though a complaint was given to the police, no action had been taken in the matter.
2.
It is apparent from the averments made in the writ petition that the petitioners and respondents 2 and 3 are residing in the very same building. The 2nd respondent is the petitioners' mother and 3rd respondent is their brother. The police can interfere only if there is any law and order situation and if any offence is committed or attempt to commit offence. The petitioners had narrated an incident which happened in 2012. Thereafter no untoward incident is seen mentioned in the writ petition or any complaint except for saying that mother slapped on a particular day.
W.P.(C) No.31288 of 2015 -: 2 :- 3.
Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, we do not think that a direction for police protection can be granted in this case. We only observe that if there is any offence committed or attempt to commit offence, it shall be open for the petitioners to file a complaint before the police, who shall look into the matter and do the needful.
With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE Jvt/30.10.2015.