IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 8629 of 2010(C)
1. VEERANKUTTY A.P., AGED 48 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. RAZIYA, W/O.VEERANKUTTY A.P.,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
4. MARIYA N.K., D/O.ABDU HAJI,
5. SHIFAS RAHMAN, S/O.VEERANKUTTY A.P.,
6. NECHIKKADAN HAMEED, S/O.ABDU HAJI,
7. NECHIKKADAN YAHAQOOB, S/O.ABDU HAJI,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI
For Respondent :SRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
Dated :24/03/2010
O R D E R
K. M. JOSEPH &
M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P(C). NO. 8629 OF 2010 C
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th March, 2010
JUDGMENT
K.M. Joseph, J.
Petitioners have approached this Court seeking the
following reliefs:
“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or other
appropriate writ, order or direction directing
respondents 1 and 2 to provide adequate police
protection to the life and property of the petitioners.
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other
appropriate writ, order or direction directing
respondents 1 to 3 to take all necessary steps so as
to ensure that Ext.P3 representation is not flouted
by respondents 4 to 7 or their men or agents.”
2. The first petitioner is residing with the second wife,
namely the second respondent. There was an earlier marriage.
That ended in divorce. It is stated that the divorced wife, the
fourth respondent and her henchmen who are arrayed as
WPC.8629/10 C 2
respondents 5 to 7, are continuously threatening and assaulting
the petitioners. There is reference to certain crimes. Petitioners
have also produced certain Certificates. Learned counsel
appearing on behalf of respondents 4 to 7 would seek to file
Counter. He would say that respondents 4 to 7 have no
intention to cause any threat to the petitioners and they have
done nothing also. Without going into the allegations and
recording the submission of the learned counsel for respondents
4 to 7, we dispose of the Writ Petition directing respondents 2
and 3 to provide adequate protection for the life of the
petitioners as against respondents 4 to 7 and their men as and
when required.
Sd/=
K.M. JOSEPH,
JUDGE
Sd/=
M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS,
JUDGE
kbk.
// True Copy //
PS to Judge