IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 24TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 28496 of 2010(J) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SATHEESH S,S/O.SAHADEVAN, AGED 36 YEARS SAJI VILASAM, CHENGAMAND, PIN-691537, CHETHADI KARA, MELILA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------- ---------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIN (CBI)ERNAKULAM UNIT 2. THE DIRECTOR CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIN (CBI) NEW DELHI ADV. SRI.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRY,SC, C.B.I. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.28496 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. The petitioner states that he runs an institution preparing students for entrance examination for recruitment in the Indian Railways and Indian Army. He says that one Praveen and Rajesh were arrested by the C.B.I. on allegation of having received amounts offering appointments in the Indian Army and that C.B.I. officials of Ernakulam unit are visiting the residence of the petitioner in search of him. The petitioner further states that his father is suffering from acute cancer and is admitted in the Amrutha hospital and the C.B.I. officials are regularly coming to the hospital also in search of him. We find that the immediate requirement is for the petitioner to appear before the first respondent Superintendent of C.B.I. If there is any case against him, the C.B.I. officials are well within authority to question him. Learned counsel for the C.B.I. states that the petitioner is the WPC.28496/10 2 third accused. With this, we are not inclined to treat this writ petition on allegation of police harassment as an application for bail or anticipatory bail. Therefore, we dismiss this writ petition without prejudice to the petitioner's right to seek relief from the competent court, in accordance with law. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- P.Q.BARKATH ALI, Judge. kkb.16/09.