2025:KER:28738 W.P.(C)No.3086 of 2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 3086 OF 2025 PETITIONER: RADHESH BHAT AGED 46 YEARS S/O OF RAJAGOPAL BHAT, ELLIKAATTU PARAMBIL HOUSE,66/5562/TD, EAST SANNIDHI ROAD, OPPOSITE T.D. TEMPLE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682035 BY ADVS. K.R.SUNIL NAVAMI ANILKUMAR SHILPA K.K. RESPONDENTS: 1 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682011 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682016 3 SREEVIDHYA D/O OF PAVAN KUMAR PAI, SAWPARNIKA APARTMENTS, FLOOR 6.B, T.D ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682035 4 PAVAN KUMAR PAI SAWPARNIKA APARTMENTS, FLOOR 6.B, T.D ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682035 2025:KER:28738 W.P.(C)No.3086 of 2025 2 BY ADVS. R.RANJANIE SELVA JYOTHY A.(K/004688/2024) GP - SRI AJITH VISWANATHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:28738 W.P.(C)No.3086 of 2025 3 C.S.DIAS, J -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No. 3086 of 2025 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2025 JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider Ext.P1 and provide adequate police protection to the life and properties of the petitioner. 2. The 3rd respondent is the wife of the petitioner. The 4th respondent is the father of the 3rd respondent. The marital relationship between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent is strained. The petitioner is apprehensive that the 3rd respondent may cause danger to his life. Even though he has submitted Ext. P1 complaint before the 2nd respondent against the threats being caused by the 3rd respondent, no 2025:KER:28738 W.P.(C)No.3086 of 2025 4 action has been taken in the matter. Hence, the writ petition. 3. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations in the writ petition. She has stated that the petitioner has manhandled her. Nonetheless, she has no intention to cause any danger to the life of the petitioner. Therefore, the writ petition may be dismissed. 4. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit denying the allegations in the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent. He has prayed that the writ petition may be allowed. 5. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. 6. On a consideration of the facts and the materials on record, it is evident that the marital relationship between the petitioner and the 3rd 2025:KER:28738 W.P.(C)No.3086 of 2025 5 respondent is strained. They have made allegations and counter allegations against each other. However, as on today, I do not find any crime registered by the 2nd respondent. Therefore, I am of the definite view that, in case the petitioner or the 3rd respondent have any grievance as against each other, it would be up to them to approach the 2nd respondent and file a complaint, who shall ascertain the genuineness of the complaint and act in accordance with law. However, the 2nd respondent shall not interfere in the matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. In the meantime, it would be upto the petitioner and the 3rd respondent to work out their statutory remedies available under the law. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- C.S.DIAS, JUDGE SCB.03.04.25. 2025:KER:28738 W.P.(C)No.3086 of 2025 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3086/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18/01/2025, SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 18.01.2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT