IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2011 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 9476 of 2011(H) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- KUNHI MUHAMMED, S/O.MOIDEEN, KALATHIL HOUSE, THALAPPILLY TALUK, DESAMANGALAM DESOM, TRICHUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. MALINI, W/O.SASIKUMAR, AGED 39 YEARS, ASWATHI NILAYAM, PADINJARETHOPPIL, THALAPPILLY TALUK, CHERUTHURUTHY P.O., TRICHUR DISTRICT, PIN-679 531. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THRISSUR. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR RURAL. 5. C.I. OF POLICE, VADAKKANCHERRY POLICE STATION. 6. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERUTHURUTHY POLICE STATION. R1 BY SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL), SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN, R2 TO R6 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K. VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/04/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.9476/2011-H: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBIT: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.2. DTD. 23/03/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. R.BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 9476 OF 2011 H ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th April, 2011. JUDGMENT Basant, J. Petitioner is the owner of a shop room. The first respondent is using the said premises now. As to whether the arrangement is one of lease or licence there is no agreement between the parties. Be that as it may, the first respondent went to the Civil Court complaining about the attempt of forcible eviction by the petitioner herein. Interim order has been passed in favour of the first respondent, a woman. At this juncture the petitioner has come to this Court complaining about police harassment. He prays that directions may be issued under Art.226 to abate such harassment/vexation by the police. The police succumbing to the influence of the first respondent is compelling the petitioner to settle the property dispute between him and the fourth respondent, complains the petitioner. 2. The first respondent has entered appearance. The learned counsel for the first respondent submits that even after the Civil Court passed the interim order the petitioner is WPC 9476/2011 2 continuing to indulge in questionable conduct. The first respondent is being vexed and harassed by such culpable and violent conduct on the part of the petitioner. The first respondent was in these circumstances obliged to complain to the police. Police have registered crime 78/2011. The first respondent is in no way interested in harassing or vexing the petitioner. Petitioner may be directed to comply the order of the Civil Court and not to indulge in any culpable conduct against the first respondent submits the learned counsel for the first respondent. 3. The learned Govt. Pleader after taking instruction submits that the parties are already before the Civil Court. They must seek appropriate directions from the Civil Court. Regarding the civil dispute police shall not take any action. However, the complaint of the first respondent now is of culpable and violent conduct on the part of the petitioner while she continues in possession on the strength of the order of the Civil Court. Such complaints cannot be ignored by the police. Police have to take proper action. It is in these circumstances that crime 78/2011 has been registered. Action shall be taken against the petitioner only for the proper investigation of the WPC 9476/2011 3 said crime. The legal action taken for the investigation of a crime cannot be described as vexation and harassment. Petitioner cannot avoid an investigation against him of commission of crime on the basis of such complaints about illusory harassment and vexation. 4. The learned Govt. Pleader undertakes that Police Officers shall take action strictly in accordance with law for the investigation of crime 78/2011 of Cheruthuruthy Police Station. Petitioner shall not be called to the police station for any other purposes. Petitioner shall be at liberty to appear before a Magistrate or the Investigating Officer and seek regular bail. He will be at liberty to seek anticipatory bail also. The petitioner cannot expect to deter the police from taking legal action in respect of a crime registered by raising an unjustified plea of vexation and harassment. It may be recorded unambiguously that the Police Officers shall not compel the petitioner in any manner to settle the civil dispute with the first respondent. Action shall be taken against the petitioner only in accordance with law submits the learned Govt. Pleader. WPC 9476/2011 4 5. We record the submissions of the learned Govt. Pleader. We are satisfied that no further specific directions are necessary in this petition. This petition is accordingly dismissed. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 9476/2011 5 Heard. Admitted. Notice given and learned Govt. Pleader appears for respondents 2 to 6. Issue notice to respondent No:1. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays and is accordingly permitted to take out notice to first respondent by special messenger. Verify service and call again on 1-4-2011. We make it clear that there is no interim order. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 9476/2011 6