IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2011 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10422 of 2011(C) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- C.CHANDRABABU,'VALSALA BHAVAN',KP 8/523, MNR-4,VADAKKE MADOM,KUDAPPANAKKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, SMT.BINDU GEORGE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY – 695 001. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEROORKADA POLICE STATION – 695 134. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEROORKADA POLICE STATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 134. 5. VIKRAMAN @ GOPI,MANAGING TRUSTEE, THAPOVANAM SIDHASHRAMAM TRUST,MULAYARATHALA VEEDU, KUDAPPANAKUNNU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 043. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K. VIPINDAS, R5 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH P.NAIR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/04/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.10422/2011-C: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 17/02/09 IN R.P.44/08. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 20/02/06. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 31/07/08. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 21/02/2011. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 24/02/2011. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM REPORTED IN KERALASHABDAM WEEKLY (RELEVANT PORTION). RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.10422 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th April, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioner complains of harassment by the police. According to the petitioner, the fifth respondent is a very influential neighbour of the petitioner. There have been disputes between the petitioner and the fifth respondent in relation to a tree which was overhanging on the boundary. The petitioner is continuously vexing and harassing the petitioner by filing false and frivolous complaints. The police are succumbing to the influence of the fifth respondent and are indulging in unnecessary vexation against the petitioner. The petitioner is being called to the Police Station frequently. This interferes with his peaceful life. Appropriate directions may be issued, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The fifth respondent has entered appearance. Counsel prays for time for filing counter affidavit. We have heard the learned counsel. The counsel in short contends WPC No.10422/2011 2 that the fifth respondent is not guilty of making any false complaint. Genuine complaints have been filed. It is the petitioner who indulges in the exercise of filing false complaints, contends the learned counsel for the fifth respondent. 3. We turned to the learned Government Pleader for submissions. The learned Government Pleader submits that several complaints have been received from the fifth respondent against the petitioner. Those complaints were enquired into. Those complaints were found not to deserve any further action. No further steps have been taken against the petitioner. For enquiry in connection with such complaints, it is, of course, true that the parties were called to the Police Station. Police shall not call the petitioner to the Police Station hereafter unless the same be required for purposes justified under law. In such event, written communication shall be given to the petitioner to appear before the police. This undertaking may be accepted and further proceedings may be dropped, prays the learned Government Pleader. 4. We have considered all the relevant inputs. In the WPC No.10422/2011 3 light of the stand taken by the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 2 to 4, we are satisfied that no further action is necessary in this writ petition. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent submits that the fifth respondent's grievances are genuine. If on genuine grievance the police do not take any action, the fifth respondent shall be at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings under law. Hereafter also, if the fifth respondent has any genuine grievance, this order will not in any way stand against the fifth respondent making such complaints before the police. 5. With the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed. R.BASANT JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/