IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2011 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 33951 of 2010(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- HARISH. V.K, S/O.SUKUMARAN, AGED 29 YEARS, CHOONDAYIL KURUPPATH, KILLIKKATTU KURISHI P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT- NOW RESIDING AT A7, ANJALI APARTMENTS, CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR P.O., EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24. BY ADV. SRI.KRISHNADAS P. NAIR, SMT.K.L.SREEKALA. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION, ALUVA, PIN-683 104. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALAMASSERY, ALUVA, PIN-683 104. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, S.P. OFFICE, ALUVA, PIN-683 101. 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 5. PIYOOSA. A.A, D/O.ANTONY, AGED 30 YEARS, ARAKKAL HOUSE, CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR P.O., THRIKKAKARA, KOCHI, NOW RESIDING AT A7, ANJALI APARTMENTS, CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR P.O., EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.T.K. VIPINDAS. R5 BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE, SRI.A.V.JOJO. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/04/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 33951 of 2010(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 19/06/2010 ISSUED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-II, ALUVA. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P. NO. 70/2010 DATED 26/08/2010 OF FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 06/11/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R5(a): COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PETITION NO.70/10 FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.R5(b): COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY. EXT.R5(c): COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 03/08/2010 IN WP(CRL) NO. 240/2010 OF THE HONOURABLE COURT. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs R.BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 33951 OF 2010 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th April, 2011. JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court complaining about harassment by the Police at the instance of fifth respondent, his wife. According to the petitioner there are certain disputes between him and his wife. Succumbing to the influence of his wife and relatives of the wife, the police are unnecessarily resorting to harassment against the petitioner. Directions under Art.226 may be issued to abate such harassment, prays the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Fifth respondent has entered appearance. According to the fifth respondent there were certain disputes between the petitioner and the fifth respondent. A complaint was filed before the police. A crime under Section 498A IPC was registered at the Kalamassery Police Station as Crime 672/2010. There was subsequent resumption of cohabitation on the basis of an attempted settlement. But according to the fifth respondent even subsequently the petitioner continued with his violent WPC 33951/2010 2 conduct. This obliged the fifth respondent to file another complaint on the basis of which a fresh crime 1995/2010 of Kalamassery Police Station has been registered afresh. The fifth respondent is not interested in harassing the petitioner in any manner. She has only lodged a criminal complaint giving expression of her grievances. 3. The learned Govt. Pleader after taking instruction from respondents 1 to 3 submits that the police is not interested in harassing the petitioner in any manner. Two crimes have been registered. In the first crime no steps are to be taken. In the latter crime as investigation is in progress necessary steps have to be taken. Though the police have been wanting to contact the petitioner it is totally incorrect to say that there has been any vexation or harassment emanating from respondents 1 to 3 against the petitioner. Petitioner can surrender before the Magistrate or Police and then seek regular bail. In the alternative he can seek anticipatory bail. The learned Govt. Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 submits that the police shall take only steps in accordance with law, which are necessary for a proper investigation of the crime. 4. We have taken note of all the relevant inputs. The mere fact that the second crime has been registered raising WPC 33951/2010 3 allegations again under Section 498A IPC cannot be said to amount to harassment. We are in these circumstances satisfied that no directions under Art.226 of the Constitution can, need or deserve to be issued. It is for the petitioner to take necessary steps in accordance with law in the crime that has already been registered against him. It is submitted before us that proceedings are pending before the learned Magistrate under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The learned Magistrate has referred the parties to the Lok Adalath for attempting a harmonious settlement. The learned Govt. Pleader on behalf of the police submits that the police shall also co-operate if it is possible to settle the matter harmoniously between the spouses. 5. Recording the above submissions this petition is dismissed holding that no further directions under Art.226 of the Constitution is necessary. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 33951/2010 4 WPC 33951/2010 5