Back
2008 Supreme(Online)(KER) 28154
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, M.C.HARI RANI, JJ
THAHIRA SHAMSUDHEEN – Appellant
Versus
SUPDT. OF POLICE, THRISSUR – Respondent
WP(C)/20316/2008
SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), SR.GOVT.PLEADER SHRI BENJAMIN PAUL FOR R1 & R2
Police intervention is justified when there is a credible threat to safety; however, without evidence of present danger, no further protective measures are mandated.
Headnote:
Protection - Family Security - Writ Petition - Preventive Measures - No Threat Established
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought police protection due to threats from a third respondent following a family marriage. The husband was previously imprisoned in connection with the respondent's illegal activities, and the petitioner feared for her family's safety after the respondent demanded money at the marriage.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that police had intervened during the marriage to ensure safety. The Government Pleader stated that there was currently no threat warranting police action. The court concluded that if any future threats arose, they could inform the police.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to police protection given the alleged threats from the third respondent.
Ratio Decidendi: The absence of any immediate threat to the petitioner's life or her family's safety precluded the need for ongoing police protection.
Final Decision: The writ petition is disposed of with no further action required.
J U D G M E N T
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The petitioner, who is a house-wife, has approached this Court seeking police protection to her life and that of her family members. The 3rd respondent was taken to the Gulf at the instance of the petitioner's husband. Since the said respondent got himself involved in certain illegal activities there, the petitioner's husband was also held liable for it and he suffered imprisonment for six months there, it is submitted. The marriage of the petitioner's daughter was scheduled to be held on 18.5.2008. The petitioner's husband came to attend the marriage. While so, the 3rd respondent came there demanding Rs.30 lakhs from the petitioner's husband. He tried to cause obstruction to the solemnisation of the marriage. But, he could not succeed in it. After the marriage, the petitioner's husband preferred Exhibit P3 representation before the police, seeking necessary protection to him and his family members, in the face of the threat from the 3rd respondent. Thereafter, the W.P.(C)No.20316/08 -2-
petitioner's husband went to the Gulf.
2. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that during the marriage, the police intervened effectively and rendered necessary protection. The 3rd respondent has filed a complaint claiming that the petitioner's husband owes substantial amounts to him. The police advised the said respondent to approach the civil court to redress his grievance. The learned Government Pleader further submitted that at present there is no threat to the life of the petitioner warranting interference by the police. The learned Government Pleader also submitted that, if there is any threat to her life from the part of the 3rd respondent and if the same is informed to the police, they will look into the same and take appropriate action. This submission is recorded and the Writ Petition is disposed of.
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
dsn
