SIVASANKARAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are husband and wife. The petitioners state that respondents 5 to 7 are persons residing in the neighbouring house of the petitioners. Respondents 5 to 7 have installed a CCTV Camera with light, on the north eastern side of their residential house. The Camera will result in snooping into the drawing cum dining and bedroom of the petitioners. The petitioners are residing in the house along with their daughter, daughter-in-law and a four year old child. The act of the respondents is in violation of the right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, contend the petitioners.

(2.) The house of the petitioners is situated within a compound where the 1st petitioner's brother late Sangameswaran has a residential house where is wife Devaki who is the 5th respondent and his children, who are respondents 5 and 6, are residing. Between the house of the petitioners and of the 1st petitioner's brother, there is a private pathway. The families are in inimical terms. The 5th respondent is threatening the petitioners stating that unless the petitioners ensure that a criminal case filed by one Sandhya against the 5th respondent is withdrawn, the petitioners will be harassed. Respondents 5 to 7 have installed CCTV Camera only to harass the petitioners. The petitioners submitted Ext.P3 complaint to the police authorities. No action has been taken. Hence, the petitioners are before this Court.

(3.) The 7th respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The 7th respondent submitted that the 5th respondent is a 80 year old senior citizen whose husband died four years back, residing alone in her house, and she has been a victim of offence of criminal intimidation, outraging modesty and attempt to commit rape punishable under Ss. 354, 354A(1), 354B, 511 and 376 IPC at the hands of the 1st petitioner. The 1st petitioner, who is the brother-in-law of the 5th respondent, is the sole accused in the said crime registered on 12/9/2024 by the Irinjalakuda Police. The 1st petitioner is constantly threatening the 5th respondent by means of offensive gestures and sexually explicit remarks, voyeurism and publicly showing his private part standing in front of the house of the 5th respondent. It is in such a scenario that respondents 6 and 7 decided to install a CCTV Camera in front of the house of the 5th respondent only for the safety and security and peaceful living of the 5th respondent, who is alone in the house.