IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MAY 2010 / 29TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 11584 of 2010(W) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- PURUSHOTHAMAN, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.GOVINDAN, KONNANPARAMBIL HOUSE, MEENPARA P.O., PUTHENCRUZ, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI THANKAPPAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUTHENCRUZ POLICE STATION, PUTHENCRUZ, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. K.M.JIJIMON, S/O.MATHEW, AGED ABOUT 45, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,PUTHENCRUZ, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM (RURAL),ALUVA. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.11584 of 2010-W ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 19th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court complaining harassment by respondents 1 and 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:-- Petitioner is the District Vice President of a political party by name 'Kerala Congress (Jacob)' and the High-power committee member of the said party. The 2nd respondent, the Circle Inspector of Police, was the Sub Inspector of Police, Puthencruz in the year 2001. There were complaints against him. Due to that rivalry he filed a false complaint through his father and registered a case against the petitioner and three others. Petitioner and others were acquitted in that case. It is stated that from the date on which he was appointed as the Circle Inspector of Police, he started to harass the petitioner. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Learned Government Pleader would submit that in 2010 three new cases have been registered against the petitioner apart from the earlier case WPC No.11584/2010 -2- already registered. Learned counsel for the petitioner has no case that this Court should not interfere with the crime registered in these proceedings. He has also no case that these cases should not be investigated in accordance with law. Of course, he should not be unduly harassed. If he has any complaint against any particular officer certainly he can bring it to the notice of police complaints authority. Leaving it free to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law and leaving it free to the petitioner to work out his grievances, if any, against the 2nd respondent before the appropriate authority and recording the submission of the learned Government Pleader that the petitioner will not be unduly harassed, this writ petition is disposed of. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS