IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2008 / 15TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 22048 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ---------------------- ASHA, W/O SHAJI, AGED 30 YEARS CHAMPAKKAL HOUSE, PYARI JN. THOPPUMPADY, RAMESWARAN VILLAGE, KANAYANNOR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.D.JOHNY SMT.MEREENA JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. 2. CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER , SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C). No.22048 OF 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner is running a beauty parlour which is called “Excellent Beauty Clinic”. It is housed in a single room having an area of 200 sq.ft at Layam Road, Woodlands Junction, Ernakulam. It is a parlour for men and women. But, while so, the petitioner was served with Ext.P2 series notices. As per those notices, petitioner's clients and staff were directed to appear before the Special Judicial Magistrate's Court-II, Ravipuram, to answer a charge under Section 290 of Indian Penal Code. The petitioner submits, the running of a beauty parlour can never be treated as offence under Section 290 of I.P.C. So, the action of the police will amount to harassment. So, she has filed Ext.P3 representation before the City Police Commissioner pointing out the alleged high handed actions of W.P.(C) No.22048/2008 2 the 1st respondent, Sub Inspector of Police. Thereafter, this writ petition is filed seeking appropriate reliefs. 2. The 1st respondent has filed a statement stating that police have received reports to the effect that immoral activities are going on in the petitioners' establishment. Based on that information, the Sub Inspector searched the premises and four men and three women were taken to the police station and they have been charged with the offence under Section 290 I.P.C. According to the police, now her husband is conducting the beauty parlour for men only and the petitioner is not involved. 3. Having regard to the nature of the allegations raised against the petitioner, we feel that this Court is not justified in invoking the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the actions of the 1st respondent, she can pursue the ordinary remedies available to her under the Code of Criminal Procedure and Code of Civil Procedure. W.P.(C) No.22048/2008 3 Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner and her right to move other forums for appropriate reliefs. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) ps