WP(C) NO. 39994 OF 2024 1 2025:KER:26369 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 39994 OF 2024 PETITIONER/S: JOSEPH AGED 50 YEARS THEKKEKARA, PUTHAN VEEDU AANAVATTACHIRA, DALI P.O KULATHOOPPUZHA THINGAL KARIKKAM VILLAGE KOLLAM, PIN - 691001 BY ADV VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL RESPONDENT/S: 1 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ( RURAL KOLLAM ) VHVR+F22, ASHRAMAM RD, ASRAMAM KOLLAM, KERALA, PIN - 691001 2 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER KULATHOOPPUZHA POLICE STATITION KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691310 3 3. MINI JOSEPH THEKKEKARA, PUTHANVEEDU AANAVATTACHIRA, DALI P.O KULATHOOPPUZHA, THINGAL KARIKKAM KOLLAM, PIN - 691310 4 4. JOMON THEKKEKARA PUTHANVEEDU, AANAVATTACHIRA, DALI P.O KULATHOOPUZHA, THINGALKARIKKAM VILLAGE, PIN - 691310 5 5. JIJI MOL, THEKKEKARA PUTHANVEEDU, ANAVATTACHIRA, DALI P.O KULATHOOPUZHA, THINGALKARIKKAM VILLAGE, PIN - 691310 BY ADVS. ANSU VARGHESE K.J.JOSEPH (ERNAKULAM)(K/143/2010) KRISHNANUNNI G.B.(K/3585/2022) WP(C) NO. 39994 OF 2024 2 2025:KER:26369 J.BAHULEYAN(K/1137/1994) OTHER PRESENT: GP.SRI.B.S.SYAMANTHAK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 39994 OF 2024 3 2025:KER:26369 C.S.DIAS, J. --------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 39994 OF 2024 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2025 JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to afford adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner from the threats being caused by the respondents 3 to 5. 2. The 3rd respondent is the wife of the petitioner. The respondents 4 and 5 are the children born in their wedlock. The marital relationship is strained. There are litigations pending between the parties before the Family Court, Kottarakkara. The 3rd respondent has filed M.C.No.42/2022 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Punalur invoking the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and Ext.P1 order was passed granting her right to live in the petitioner's house. Under the guise of the said order, the respondents 4 and 5 are attacking the petitioner. In fact Ext.P3 crime is registered against the respondents 3 to 5. The petitioner is WP(C) NO. 39994 OF 2024 4 2025:KER:26369 apprehensive that the respondents 3 to 5 may cause harm to his life. Hence, the writ petition. 3. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations in the writ petition. She has contended that the petitioner has filed the writ petition only for the purpose of circumventing Ext.P1 order passed by the jurisdictional Magistrate. It was the petitioner who assaulted the 4th respondent, and a complaint has been preferred by the 3rd respondent before the 2nd respondent. The complaint filed by the petitioner has already been referred as mistake of fact. The 3rd respondent is suffering form serious health issues. The petitioner has caused harm to the 3rd respondent. If the petitioner is granted an order of police protection, he would harm the respondents 3 to 5. Hence, the writ petition may be dismissed. 4. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the party respondents. 5. The materials on record reveal that the marital relationship between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent WP(C) NO. 39994 OF 2024 5 2025:KER:26369 is strained. Ext.P1 order is passed in favour of the 3rd respondent, restraining the petitioner from causing any sort of domestic violence to the 3rd respondent and causing any obstruction to the peaceful residence in the shared house (the house of the petitioner). The respondents 4 and 5 are the children of the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. However, it is undisputed that the shared household belongs to the petitioner. The respondents 4 and 5 have no legal right to enter the petitioner's property. There are cases and counter cases filed by and against the parties. Therefore, I am of the view that, as long as Ext.P1 order is in force, the petitioner cannot prevent the 3rd respondent from residing in the shared household. But, the respondents 4 and 5 have no legal right to enter the property and cause law and order problems. In the afore-said circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent to afford adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner from any threat being caused by the respondents 4 and 5. However, the 2nd respondent shall not interfere in the right WP(C) NO. 39994 OF 2024 6 2025:KER:26369 of the 3rd respondent residing in the shared household as long as Ext.P1 order is in force. The 2nd respondent shall also ensure that law and order is maintained in the petitioner's locality, without interfering in any civil/matrimonial disputes between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- C.S.DIAS, JUDGE rkc/26.03.25 WP(C) NO. 39994 OF 2024 7 2025:KER:26369 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39994/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 ORDER IN CMP 2070/ 2022 Exhibit P3 COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, KULATHOOPUZHA Exhibit P2 FIR CRIME NO. 777/2024 RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R3(a) The copy of the complaint preferred by me against the petitioner before the 2nd respondent dated 12.08.2022 Exhibit R3(b) The copy of the complaint preferred by me against the petitioner before the 2nd respondent dated 12.01.2024 Exhibit R3(c) The copy of medical certificate of the Radiologist, St. Gregorios Medical Mission Hospital