IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19052 of 2010(F)
1. REJINA,W/O.PRAMOD,AGED 27 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NALLALAM
3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
4. THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, KOZHIKODE
5. RATHEESH,S/O.DAMODARA KURUP,AGED ABOUT
6. BIJU,S/O.DASAN NAIR, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
7. SRIJITH ALIAS VAVA,S/O.VENU,AGED ABOUT
For Petitioner :SRI.K.M.FIROZ
For Respondent :SRI.SANTHARAM.P
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
Dated :21/06/2010
O R D E R
K. M. JOSEPH &
M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P(C). NO. 19052 OF 2010 F
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st June, 2010
JUDGMENT
K.M. Joseph, J.
Petitioner has approached this Court with the following
prayer:
“Call for the records leading to Ext.P1 and
direct respondents 1 to 4 to give adequate police
protection to the life and property of the petitioner
and her family members from the illegal attempts of
respondents 5, 6 and 7 and their men by issuing a
writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
direction or order.”
2. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
Government Pleader and also the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of respondents 5 to 7. Learned counsel for respondents 5
to 7 would submit that the allegations of the petitioner are not
WPC.19052/2010 F 2
correct and if the petitioner is granted the relief sought, she will
misuse the same. He would further submit that respondents 5 to
7 have no intention to cause any threat to the life of the
petitioner as apprehended by her. We record the said
submission. Learned Government Pleader would submit that a
rowdy history sheet has been opened against the petitioner. It is
submitted that several crimes have been registered against the
petitioner and this Writ Petition is to be viewed as an attempt to
stall the proposed proceedings under the Kerala Anti Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007.
3. In view of the apprehension of the petitioner, we,
besides recording the submission of the learned counsel for
respondents 5 to 7 that they have no intention to cause any threat
to the life of the petitioner, direct that if the petitioner reports
any such incident before respondents 2 to 4, they shall take
appropriate measures to secure the life of the petitioner. We
further make it clear that this Judgment shall not be understood
as in any way standing in the way of respondents 1 to 4 taking
WPC.19052/2010 F 3
any action against the petitioner, if such action is warranted in
facts and in law.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/=
K.M. JOSEPH,
JUDGE
Sd/=
M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS,
JUDGE
kbk.
// True Copy //
PS to Judge