IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 11TH APRIL 2011 / 21ST CHAITHRA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 418 of 2011(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.2915/2011 Dated 14/02/2011 .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- SOLOMON ERNEST.P, S/O. ERNEST, AGED 52 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, LE' ORANGE, PALARIVATTOM, RESIDING AT E3, FALCON HIGHTS, SOUTH JANATHA ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUDHISH SRI.SUSHANTH.J. RESPONDENT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT ----------------------------- ANIL GEORGE,(AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 025. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Contempt Case (Civil) No.418 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 11th day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T This petition is filed alleging that respondent (second respondent in Writ Petition No.2915 of 2011) has committed contempt by not complying with the directions in Annexure-A1, judgment dated February 14, 2011. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by Annexure-A1, judgment dated February 14, 2011 recording the submission of learned Public Prosecutor that search warrant has been issued, matter is being proceeded further and that the warrant has to be executed. Grievance of petitioner is that though this Court disposed of the Writ Petition recording the said submission, respondent did not conduct the search and disobeyed the undertaking made before this Court which amounted to contempt. Learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions submitted that on 24.03.2001 the search was conducted in the premises of accused 1 to 3 and a search list also is prepared. 3. It is true that this Contempt Case (C) was filed on Contempt Case (Civil) No.418 of 2011 2 21.03.2011 and the search was conducted (as learned Public Prosecutor submitted) only on 24.03.2011 while Annexure-A1, judgment was passed on February 14, 2011. But there was no time limit prescribed by Annexure-A1, judgment for the respondent to conduct the search. Hence I am not inclined to think that the respondent has committed any contempt in the matter which this Court is required to take cognizance of. Recording the submission of learned Public Prosecutor that the search was conducted on 24.03.2011 and since I found that there is no contempt on the part of the respondent, this Contempt Case (Civil) is closed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv