IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2010 / 23TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 509 of 2010(K) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- V.T.VARGHESE, S/O.THOMMAN, AGED 70 YEARS, VEVUKATTIL HOUSE, VARAPUZHA P.O., MUTTINAKAM KARA, VARAPUZHA VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.M.ZIRAJ. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUVA POLICE STATION. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM (RURAL), ALUVA. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER MR. R. LAKSHMI NARAYAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.R.RAMAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 509 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 13th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT Raman, J. Petitioner has filed this writ petition alleging police harassment on the part of the Circle Inspector of Police, Alwaye. The complaint made by the petitioner is that he is the owner of 14 country boats with canal pass issued by the Canal Officer. Besides, he is also looking after 4 other country boats, which also having canal pass, owned by his son. The canal pass said to be valid up to 31-3-2009. On 27- 12-2009 two Police Constables under the 1st respondent came to the kadavu and the petitioner was directed to remove the country boats from the said kadavu without any W.P.(C) No. 509/2010 2 basis. According to the petitioner, if the petitioner is not allowed to tie his country boats in the kadavu or the country boats are demolished, much hardship and injury will be caused to him. In the above circumstances, he submitted Ext.P19 representation before the Superintendent of Police, Alwaye, but no action is taken . Hence, this writ petition. 2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is alleged to be involved in illegal sand mining and the Circle Inspector of Police, Alwaye has no jurisdiction in respect of the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the present petition is only a preemptive step from taking further action. According to him, the petitioner has not yet been booked of any criminal case. In such circumstances, in the wake of the factual dispute, this Court is not in a position to reach a finding on facts as to whether there is actual harassment made or not . However, since the petitioner made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Alwaye, a higher authority, we direct the Superintendent of Police, Alwaye to enquire into W.P.(C) No. 509/2010 3 the complaint Ext.P19 and after hearing the parties do the needful, in accordance with law. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE. mn.