RAZIYA ANDIYATH Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has come to this Court with this petition seeking directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 1 to 3 to afford police protection for her against the alleged illegal, violent and culpable conducts of the 5th respondent. The 4th respondent is her husband. The 5th respondent is a friend of the 4th respondent. He is also the uncle's son of the 4th respondent. According to the petitioner, the 4th respondent is employed abroad. The 5th respondent is available in India. The petitioner's daughter had fallen in love with a person and a petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus was filed before this Court. Ext.R5(d) is the judgment passed in that case. According to the petitioner, the 5th respondent is vexing, tormenting, harassing and indulging in objectionable conduct against the petitioner. She prayed that appropriate directions may be issued to respondents 1 to 3 to abate such hardship to her from the 5th respondent.

(2.) RESPONDENTS 4 and 5 have entered appearance. They totally deny the allegations. The 4th respondent asserts that he has already divorced the petitioner in accordance with law and that he has nothing more to do with the petitioner. According to the 4th and 5th respondents, the petitioner is residing in a house which belonged originally to the 4th respondent and which has later been transferred to the 5th respondent. The learned counsel for the 4th respondent submits that in view of the divorce, the 4th respondent shall not proceed to the petitioner hereafter. The learned counsel on behalf of the 5th respondent accepts that both the 4th and 5th respondents shall not in any way cause any difficulties or hardship to the petitioner. They have not done so hitherto and shall not do so hereafter. False allegations of improper behaviour are being raised against the petitioner by respondents 4 and 5 with malicious motives, allege respondents 4 and 5.

(3.) WE are satisfied, in these circumstances, that no further specific directions are necessary. WE record the submission of the learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 that respondents 4 and 5 shall not in any way proceed to the residence of the petitioner or cause hardship, inconvenience or harassment to the petitioner. WE record the submission of the learned Government Pleader that if there be any such genuine complaint of contumacious and culpable acts on the part of respondents 4 and 5, respondents 1 to 3 shall afford necessary protection to the petitioner. WE further specifically record the submission of respondents 4 and 5 that they shall not in any way cause obstruction to the residence of the petitioner in her present residence subject of course to the right of the 5th respondent to recover the property in accordance with law through the civil court. WE further record that though the 4th respondent claimed that he has divorced the petitioner, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there has been no divorce in accordance with law and the petitioner is unaware of and does not accept any such divorce.