IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2011 / 13TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20796 of 2011(Y) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- GIRISH KUMAR G., PULATHARAVILAKATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, U.S.ROAD, VELLAYAMBALAM, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.VIJAYAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. RAJENDRAN, DETECTIVE INSPECTOR, O.C.W, MARAPPALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUSEUM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.20796/2011 Y APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: REPRESENTATION DTD. 22/07/11 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P2: REPRESENTATION DTD. 25/07/11 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C). No. 20796 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T Pius C.Kuriakose, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner complaining that the first respondent is harassing him without any justifiable cause. On considering this writ petition for admission we directed the learned Govt. Pleader to seek instructions from R1 and R2 as to the correctness of the accusations contained in the writ petition. Today, Sri. T.K.Vipindas, learned Govt. Pleader submitted before us that an anonymous complaint was received by the Crime Branch as well as by the local police against the petitioner. As this complaint contained serious accusations against the petitioner it was penal action should be initiated against the petitioner under the Money Lenders Act . The police wanted to question the petitioner in connection with the complaint. This cannot amount to harassment. The learned counsel for WP(C).20796/11. -2- the petitioner Smt. Vijayakumari would submit that complaints received against the petitioner are absolutely false and the police is not justified in taking action upon anonymous complaints. 3. We have considered the rival submissions addressed at the Bar. We cannot agree with the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the police is not entitled to take action on an anonymous complaint. Having regard to the submissions addressed we are of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of issuing the following directions. Respondents 1 to 3 and police officers under any one of them are directed to issue notice to the petitioner if the attendance of the petitioner is required in connection with the enquiry into the complaint anonymous or otherwise received against the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to appear before the police on receiving such notice. If any WP(C).20796/11. -3- complaint is received against the petitioner in future also, the same procedure should be adopted by respondents 1 to 3 and officers acting under them. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-