IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18200 of 2010(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- RIYAZ B.S., S/O.RASHEED A., AGED 30 YEARS, SAFIYA MANZIL, AMBALATHARA, POONITHURA P.O., PROPRIETOR, FLAMES FOR MEN, HEERA CHAMBERS, PAZHAVANGADI, MANNAKKAD VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY SMT.K.R.RIJA SMT.BINDU GEORGE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. G.P. SHRI T K VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 18200 of 2010 Y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 3 and 4 not to harass the petitioner by repeatedly summoning him to their office and by sending police to the shop and house of the petitioner on the pretext of any investigation. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 3 and 4 to give sufficient prior notice in writing to the W.P.(C).No. 18200 of 2010 2 petitioner if he is required in connection with any enquiry. 2. Briefly the case of the petitioner is as follows. Petitioner is a Law College student and he is conducting textile business for his livelihood. The petitioner complained that he has been falsely implicated in the Pushkala case. It is stated that the police went to Bangalore and arrested the petitioner. The shop of the petitioner is under surveillance. 3, The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that if the petitioner is required for questioning, it will be preceded by notice under Section 160 Cr.P.C. We notice prayer No.2 also in this regard. 3. We dispose of the Writ Petition making it clear that investigation against the petitioner can continue. But if the petitioner is required for questioning, it shall be preceded by notice under Section 160 Cr.P.C. When we say that investigation can W.P.(C).No. 18200 of 2010 3 proceed in accordance with law, it also mean that there cannot be any abuse of law or harassment to the petitioner, as contemplated under law. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm