Thankamony vs Superintendent of Police and Others

R. Basant, J.—Petitioner, a woman has come to this Court with this petition claiming issue of directions to Respondents 1 to 4 to afford protection to her against any illegal, unjustified contumacious and violent objections and obstructions on the part of the fifth Respondent against the solemnization and celebration of the marriage of her son on 26-3-2011.

According to the Petitioner when she was living with the sixth Respondent her son Sony was born. His marriage is to be celebrated on 26-3-2011. Ext. P2 invitation has been printed and issued to many persons. In that it is shown that the Petitioner and the father of the said Sony i.e the additional sixth Respondent are inviting the guests for the wedding. The sixth Respondent has now severed his relationship with the Petitioner and is residing with the fifth Respondent. The Petitioner apprehends that the fifth Respondent who resents the sixth Respondent taking an active part in the marriage of the son of the Petitioner is likely to cause unjustified obstruction to the celebration of the wedding. It is in these circumstances that this petition has been filed by the Petitioner.

Additional sixth Respondent who has been impleaded has appeared before Court. He confirms through his counsel that he had lent his name as the father of the bridegroom in the invitation for the marriage of the Petitioner''s son. The additional sixth Respondent also intends to take part and participate in the wedding celebrations. He has no objection in the relief being granted to the Petitioner.

The fifth Respondent though served has not chosen to enter appearance. The learned Govt. Pleader after taking instructions from the police officials submits that necessary police protection shall be afforded by the officials concerned. The learned Govt. Pleader submits that the police had contacted the fifth Respondent and the fifth Respondent who has not chosen to appear before Court has informed the police officials that she shall not in any way cause obstruction against the marriage of the son of the Petitioner or against the sixth Respondent participating in the wedding. If there is any act on the part of the fifth Respondent contrary to such undertaking, necessary action shall promptly be taken by the police submits the learned Govt. Pleader.

We have considered all the relevant circumstances. We are satisfied that appropriate directions can be issued.

In the result:

a) This petition is allowed.

b) The fourth Respondent is directed to afford adequate and sufficient police protection to the Petitioner to get the marriage of her son i.e the son of the sixth Respondent celebrated without any objection/obstruction on the part of the fifth Respondent.

We have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Called upon to explain why Mohanan said to be the father of the Petitioner''s son is not seen arrayed as a party. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has no objection in the said Mohanan being arrayed as party and notice being ordered to him. Considering the urgency of the matter we direct that the said K.K. Mohanan who now resides with the fifth Respondent at the same address as that of the fifth Respondent be arrayed as the additional sixth Respondent suo motu in this writ petition.

Heard. Admitted. Notice given and the learned Govt. Pleader appears for Respondents 1 to 4. Issue notice to Respondents 5 and additional sixth Respondent. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner prays and is accordingly permitted to take out notice to Respondents 5 and 6 by special messenger. We direct the Registry to carry out the requisite amendments to include the additional sixth Respondent on the array of parties. Verify service and call again on 24-3-2011.