MANJU SAM Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this Writ Petition under Article 226, the petitioner a 39 year old lady seeks protection for her life and for the property purchased by her under Ext.P1 certificate and delivered over to her under Ext.P2 delivery report of the Family Court, Thiruvalla, against the 4th respondent, her husband and the 5th responder her mother-in-law. According to her, though she filed Ext.P3 petition before the Sub INspector of Police/the first respondent, no action has been taken by the first respondent on the same. Smt.G.Krishnakumari, Advocate entering appearance on behalf of the 5th respondent submitted that the 5th respondent is a 70 year old lady and that she is not even aware of purchase of Ext.P1 property by the petitioner. The whereabouts of her son, 4th respondent are not presently known. The 5th respondent has been unnecessarily dragged into the dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent. The 5th respondent is not aware of the details of the proceedings before the Family Court either. 5th respondent has never caused any threat to the life, person or to the property of the petitioner. Notice sent to the 4th respondent by post was returned as refused.

(2.) THE learned Government Pleader Smt.C.M.Charisma on instructions submitted that Ext.P3 petition was received only recently by post. As soon as the same is received the first respondent conducted the enquiry and the enquiry reveals that there is no threat either to the life or to the property of the petitioner from respondents 4 or 5. If any real threat on the life of the petitioner or to the property of the petitioner is reported, the first respondent will not hesitate to take appropriate action.