IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2008 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1930 WA.No. 1968 of 2006() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.30200/2002 Dated 29/09/2005 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER: -------------------------------------------- R. RAJKUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT CRA 202, ASWATHI, CHEMBAKASHERRY, PERUNTHANNI, TRIVANDRUM-8. BY ADV. SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER:RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SUDHARSANAN, DEVI HOUSE, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, PUBLIC GRIEVANCE CELL, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PETTA POLICE STATION, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.SANDESH RAJA BY ADV. SRI.A.DINESH RAO - R1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A.No.1968 OF 2006 ------------------------------------- Dated 19th June, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . First respondent/writ petitioner in this case approached this court for issuing a writ of mandamus for quashing the proceedings against him and also to produce the entire records relating to the enquiry conducted in the matter. He was conducting a restaurant in the name and style of `Happy House restaurant' and allegation was that un- accounted liquor was found in the hotel. Enquiry was conducted where it was stated that the liquor was planted conveniently by some one. The learned Judge quoted the relevant passage of the report in paragraph 2 of the judgment. In the above circumstances, proceedings pending against the petitioner were quashed. The then Sub Inspector of Police, Petta police station who was the third respondent in the writ petition, now filed this appeal in his personal capacity as learned Judge has held that it will be open to the the petitioner to pursue the remedies available to him under law against the officer who had perpetrated the alleged atrocities against him. Learned Judge did not find that appellant is responsible for the alleged atrocities against the petitioner. The direction was that if any officer is responsible for the alleged atrocities, W.A.1968/2006 2 appropriate proceedings can be taken against him. We make it clear that, if any proceedings are taken against the appellant, he will be free to take all his defences notwithstanding the observations in the impugned judgment and the court or authority has to rely on the evidence adduced in that case. Appellant in his individual capacity cannot question the quashing of criminal proceeding against the petitioner. We see no ground to interfere in the matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE tks