Shajitha Gets Police Protection from Kerala HC Under DV Act Order, Cannot Oust Ex-Husband

Kochi, August 3: The Kerala High Court has granted conditional police protection to a woman who holds a residence order under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act), while making it clear that she cannot use the police force to evict her former husband from the shared household. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas passed the order in a writ petition filed by Shajitha V.P. and her son Althaf Ansil.

A Delicate Balance of Rights

The court was faced with a peculiar situation where both the petitioner and the fifth respondent (the former husband) claimed rights over the same property. The petitioner had obtained a residence order from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Cherthala on October 22, 2020, which restrained the fifth respondent from interfering with her peaceful possession and use of the residential building. However, the fifth respondent argued that the petitioner and her supporters had used force to prevent him from even entering his own property, as evidenced by an Advocate Commissioner's report in a civil suit filed by him.

Allegations and Denials

The petitioner alleged that the fifth respondent was threatening her and compelling her to vacate the shared household. She claimed that he was highly influential and politically well-connected, posing a serious threat to her life. The State submitted that no law and order situation existed warranting police protection. The fifth respondent denied all allegations of threat or intimidation, asserting that the petition was merely a tactic to keep him out of his own property.

Court's Observations

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed that both parties are required to share the household under the existing DV Act order, but their conflicting personalities could create tension.

"Sharing the household by these two conflicting personalities can necessarily create tension."

The court emphasized the need for protection but also cautioned against misuse:

"If the petitioners apprehend any imminent threat , they ought to be given the necessary protection to ensure that she is not harmed physically or mentally."

"The petitioner cannot use the police force as a means to evict the fifth respondent from his own property."

The Verdict

The court disposed of the petition with a direction to the Station House Officer of Poochakkal Police Station (fourth respondent) to afford adequate protection to the petitioners as and when required, based on a written intimation and if satisfied that circumstances warrant. The court clarified:

"It is, however, clarified that this order shall not be used to prevent the fifth respondent from entering into his own property, which is the subject matter of the order under Ext.P1."

Case Details

The case is Shajitha V.P. and Another v. State of Kerala and Others (W.P.(C) No. 18218 of 2026). The petitioners were represented by Advocates Anoop Joseph, Zerene Linda Mitchel, Aswani Thuvvakkadan, K.K.Dajula, Joseph Sunny, Yogesh V. Pai, and Ashly Joseph. The fifth respondent was represented by Advocate K.A. Anas, and the State by Government Pleader Anirudh Kadavil.