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 11TH AUGUST 2011 / 20TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21002 of 2011(A) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ SHAJI, S/O JOSEPH, AGED 42 YEARS, KOOLIYATH HOUSE, EDAYAKKUNNAM, CHERANELLOOR VILLAGE, SOUTH CHITTOOR P.O. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.AJITHKUMAR (VALATH) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, MATTANCHERY-682002. * ADDL. R2 P.I. SAINUDHEEN, S/O IBRAHIM, HOUSE NO.12/229, PANAYAPPILLY HOUSE, KOOVAPADAM DESOM, NEAR COCHIN COLLEGE, THOPPUMPADY P.O. PIN-682005 ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF FOR R2 *[ADDL. R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.05/08/11 IN I.A.12702/11 IN WPC.21002/11] THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 21002 of 2011(A) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE UNSIGNED AGREEMENT DATED NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.21002 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The petitioner has approached this Court complaining that at the instance of the additional second respondent, the first respondent Assistant Commissioner of Police is intervening in a civil dispute between the petitioner and the Additional Second Respondent and is compelling the petitioner to settle that dispute other than in accordance with law. The learned Government Pleader on the basis of the instructions received from the first respondent submitted that the attendance of the petitioner is requested only when the complaint was received from the second respondent. The enquiry revealed that the dispute between the petitioner and the second respondent is a civil dispute and the parties have been advised to have recourse to the process of civil court. Sri.K.K.Mohammed Ravuf, the learned W. P. C. No.21002 of 2011 -2- counsel for the second respondent submitted that it is not correct to say that the dispute which is subject matter of the complaints submitted by the second respondent is civil in nature. The dispute pertains to swindling of large sums of money. There is justification for setting the criminal law in motion. The police was about to do so. But it was to prevent the police from doing so, that the present Writ Petition was filed without any justifiable reasons. Even though Sri.Ravuf was very persuasive, in view of the stand taken by the police, we are unable to issue the directions sought for. We decline jurisdiction and dismiss the Writ Petition. We permit the second respondent to move either the civil court or the competent Magistrate Court for redressal of his grievances. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/- W. P. C. No.21002 of 2011 -3-