IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2011 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 12931 of 2011(N) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.T.VINAYAN, S/O.THANKAPPAN, AGED 44 YEARS, KANNAYATH HOUSE, NEAR CHEMAYAM SHIVA BHADRA KALI TEMPLE, KOONAMAVU P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.T.MADHU, SRI.B.S.SURAJ KRISHNA. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM (RURAL), OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM (RURAL), ERNAKULAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARAPPUZHA POLICE STATION, VARAPPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. P.N.BINDU, D/O.NARAYANAN, PATHRAKADAVIL HOUSE, N.A.D., P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 683 101. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K. VIPINDAS, R4 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.RAJEEV (ALUVA). THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/05/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.12931/2011-N: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING MADE BY THE PARENTS OF THE PETITIONER TO THE R.4. DTD. 16/02/2011. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 03/03/2011 IN M.C. 89/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT-1, ALUVA. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.12931 of 2011-N ***************************** Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Petitioner has come to this Court complaining of police harassment. He seeks directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 1 to 3 to desist from harassment meted out to him. 2. The 4th respondent is the wife of the petitioner. There admittedly is matrimonial discord. The matter was allegedly settled vide Ext.P1. The terms of Ext.P1 have not been complied with. According to the petitioner, subsequently Ext.P2 order has been secured and there is a dispute as to whether the amount stipulated in Ext.P1 is liable to be paid even after Ext.P2 order. 3. Be that as it may, the petitioner now complains that the police is unnecessarily interfering in the matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent. At the instance of the 4th respondent and her relatives, the police is harassing the petitioner, it is complained. 4. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions submits that there is no question of harassing the W.P(C) No.12931 of 2011-N 2 petitioner. He is the 1st accused in Crime No.299 of 2011 of Varappuzha Police Station registered under Section 498 A I.P.C. The petitioner is absconding. Attempts are being made to trace the petitioner. Actions strictly in accordance with law alone shall be taken by the police in the investigation of Crime No.299 of 2011. The apprehension of harassment is unjustified, submits the learned Government Pleader. 5. The 4th respondent has also entered appearance. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 4th respondent submit that there has been a renewed attempt to settle the disputes. Some terms are to be complied with. It is hoped that comprehensive settlement of all outstanding dispute can be reported, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. The option of the parties to settle the disputes and to report such composition before the authorities including the police notwithstanding, we are satisfied that no directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India deserve to be issued now in the light of the undertaking by the learned Government Pleader that the police shall not harass the petitioner and that action shall be taken against him strictly in accordance with law W.P(C) No.12931 of 2011-N 3 for the investigation of Crime No.299 of 2011 of Varappuzha Police Station. 7. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that no directions deserve to be issued now. This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with the above observations. We make it clear that the dismissal of this petition will not in any way stand in the way of the parties settling their disputes and reporting such settlement to the authorities concerned. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/