Kerala High Court
Paul Joseph vs Shamla Paul on 21 April, 2017
Author: K.Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 12TH CHAITHRA, 1940
WP(C).No. 39435 of 2017
PETITIONER :
PAUL JOSEPH,
AGED 42, S/O. J0SEPH PAUL,
77/13, ARAMBAN KUDIYIL HOUSE,
NAYAPPILLY P.O., KUTTAMPUZHA,
KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM)
SRI.PRASANTH M.P
RESPONDENTS :
1. SHAMLA PAUL,
AGED 39, OCEAN GEMS & PEARLS,
OPPOSITE STYLE PLUS,
DEVASWOM BOARD JUNCTION,
KOWDIAR P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003.'
2. PONNAN ALEX G.R.,
S/O. GERARLD REBELLO, MAJELLAS,
SOUTH CHAVARA P.O.,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691 584.
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION,
MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695 001.
4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION,
MEDICAL COLLEGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN - 695 001.
5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
FORT POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN - 695 001.
WP(C).No. 39435 of 2017
6. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
FORT POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
7. THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
8. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECREARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH
R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.PRAVEEN
R3-R8 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.P.THAJUDDIN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-04-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
EL
WP(C).No. 39435 of 2017 (D)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -V,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN C.M.P NO.661/2017 IN M.C
NO.34/2017 DATED 21.4.2017.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BEFORE THE
FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 23.7.2017.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DAED
30.10.2017.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 30.10.2017.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 02.11.2017.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIOENR BEFORE THE 3RD RESPODNENT DATED
18.11.2017.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPODNENT DATED
18.11.2017.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED
18.11.2017.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 07.7.2017.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
DATED 07.7.2017.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
NIL
TRUE COPY
P.S. TO JUDGE
EL
6.4.2018
K.VINOD CHANDRAN & ASHOK MENON, JJ.
-------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 39435 of 2017
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2018
JUDGMENT
Ashok Menon, J.
The petitioner is before us seeking protection from the alleged threats of respondents 1 and 2. The 1 st respondent is none other than the petitioner's legally wedded wife. They have also two children born in the wedlock. However, the matrimonial relationship ran into rough weather as the 1st respondent had developed intimacy with the 2nd respondent, who also is having estranged relationship with his own wife. The 2 nd respondent has now severed his relationship with his wife. In order to harass the petitioner, the 1st respondent filed petitions against him before the Magistrate's Court under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, raising baseless allegations and obtained an order, which is Ext.P1. The petitioner has challenged that order before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Because of the continuance of the harassment meted out to the petitioner, he was coerced to WP(C) 39435/2017 2 file a joint petition with 1st respondent for divorce by mutual consent, copy of that application is Ext.P2. The petitioner states that when he had been to meet his children, he found the 2nd respondent together with the 1st respondent at her house and there occurred an altercation between the petitioner and respondents 1 and 2. The petitioner states that he was abused and assaulted. He filed Ext.P3 complaint before the police. However, no action has been taken. The petitioner was once travelling from Kothamangalam to Thiruvananthapuram, in his car and he found respondents 1 and 2 travelling together in another car. Just for confirming the same, he overtook their vehicle and found both of them and also his child inside the car. However, the 1st respondent misrepresented facts and filed a complaint before the police alleging that the petitioner had attempted to hit her car and cause hurt to her. On the basis of that complaint, Ext.P4 F.I.R. was registered against him. Narrating the true incidents, he had filed Ext.P5 complaint before the police. The 5th respondent refused to accept that complaint and hence he filed Ext.P6 before the Police Commissioner. Thereafter, on his way to Family Court to attend his case, he was waylaid by the 1 st WP(C) 39435/2017 3 respondent along with another person and was intimidated and threatened with dire consequences. The petitioner filed complaints before the respondents 3, 4 and 7 regarding that incident, which is Exts.P7 to P9. That apart, it is submitted that the wife of the 2 nd respondent has also lodged Ext.P10 complaint against the 1 st respondent for causing threat to her life. Ext.P11 is the F.I.R. that was registered on the basis of complaint filed by her. Despite all the criminal cases and complaints filed by the petitioner, respondents 1 and 2 are continuing to harass him and levelling threats against him. He was left with no other option, but to approach this Court. The petitioner seeks protection to his life from the threats held out by respondents 1 and 2.
2. The 1st respondent appeared and filed a counter- affidavit denying the allegations made against her in the petition. It is contended by her that she had started a concern by name b