IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI THURSDAY, THE

22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 31ST SRAVANA, 1946 W.P.(C) NO.10398 OF 2021 PETITIONERS:

1 ANTONY, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. LONAPPAN, PARAMMEL (H), THELAPPILLY, KARUVANNUR DESOM, PORATHISSERY VILLAGE, KARUVANNUR P.O., THRISSUR-680 711.

2 RANI, AGED 66 YEARS, W/O. ANTONY, PARAMMEL (H), THELAPPILLY, KARUVANNUR DESOM, PORATHISSERY VILLAGE, KARUVANNUR P.O., THRISSUR-680 711.

BY ADVS.

P.K.VARGHESE SRI.K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN SMT.SANJANA RACHEL JOSE RESPONDENTS:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

2 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 001.

3 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, IRINJALAKKUDA, IRINJALAKKUDA NORTH P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 125.

4 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IRINJALAKKUDA POLICE STATION, IRINJALAKKUDA NORTH P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 125.

5 NIDHIN ANTONY, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. ANTONY, PARAMMEL (H), THELAPPILLY, KARUVANNUR DESOM, PORATHISSERY VILLAGE, KARUVANNUR P.O., THRISSUR-680 711.

OTHER PRESENT:

GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI. RIYAL DEVASSY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.4.2021, THE COURT ON 22.08.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT (Dated: 22^nd August, 2024)

This writ petition is filed by two senior citizens, who are the parents of the 5^th respondent. There is marital discord between the 5^th respondent and his wife; the wife deserted him and now lives separately. The 5^th respondent came to the residence of the petitioners during weekends and assaulted them, which in turn led the petitioners to approach the Police officials. Ext.P1 complaint was filed on 12.04.2021, and similar complaints were filed before the 2^nd, 3^rd and 4^th respondents, respectively. Since no action was taken, they approached this Court.

Notice was ordered to the respondents by a special messenger and the 5^th respondent refused to sign the notice. At the time of issuance of the notice, there was an interim direction to respondents Nos.3 and 4 to afford adequate Police protection to the lives of the petitioners against the alleged illegal acts of the 5^th respondent.

Notice served by special messenger is refused by the 5^th respondent. Hence, a fresh notice need not be sent to the 5^th re- spondent. In view of the averments and allegations in the writ petition, I deem it appropriate to allow the writ petition, making the interim order absolute.

Sd/-

BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE ss APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10398/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE TEH 2ND RESPONDENT DATED

12.4.2021.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED

12.4.2021.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED

12.4.2021.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD DATED

13.4.2021 IN THE OFFICE ADDRESS OF 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD DATED

13.4.2021 IN THE OFFICE ADDRESS OF 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD DATED

13.4.2021 IN THE OFFICE ADDRESS OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.