[en] After 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan, Kudankulam nuclear project in South India however became the rallying point of large-scale protests. Agitators argued shutting down the Kudankulam project citing legal irregularities and safety comprises, and government on the other hand was convinced about the safety and desirability of the project. The project was finally challenged before the Madras High Court and as appeal before the Supreme Court of India. In this paper, using Protection Motivation Theory, we construct a narrative through public apprehension how judiciary performed the role of risk adjudicator and communicator. The court concluded that the project is safe; effectively persuading both the sides to see rationality in the arguments made. (author)