IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 27745 of 2011(P) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- NOBLE.I,AGED 46 YEARS,S/O.ITTECHERIA, RESIDING AT KALAPPILA, A.B.HOUSE,EDAMULACKAL P.O, ANCHAL , KOLLAM- 691 321. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ SRI.S.BIJU (KIZHAKKANELA) RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE STATE POLICE CHIEF,POLICE HEAD QUARTERS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 014. 2. THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (RURAL), KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT.PIN- 691 506. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT.PIN- 691 305. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANCHAL,KOLLAM DISTRICT,PIN -691 306. 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,ANCHAL POLICE STATION,KOLLAM DISTRICT ,PIN -691 306. 6. ROY GEORGE,ROY VILLA, PALAMUKKU, ANCHAL P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT,PIN- 691 306. R1 TO R6 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.27745/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.69/2010 FILED BY THE SIXTH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR. P2 COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN O.S.NO.69/2010 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR. P3 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 13/10/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. P4 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 13/10/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. P5 COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.1421/CAMP/PTN/2011. QR DATED 13/10/2011 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, KOLLAM RURAL. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JJ. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 27745 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose ,J. Petitioner has approached this court complaining that at the instance of the 6th respondent with whom he is having a civil dispute the officers of the police particularly respondents 3 to 5 are harassing him. On considering this writ petition for admission we directed the learned Government Pleader to seek instructions from the 3rd respondent as to the correctness of the accusation of police harassment levelled in this writ petition against the petitioner. The learned Government Pleader was also directed to ask the 3rd respondent as to whether he is intervening in the civil dispute between the petitioner and the 6th respondent which is already before a civil court. Today learned Senior Government Pleader Sri. M.K.Aboobacker on the basis of the instructions from the 3rd respondent submitted that the accusations of harassment by the police are without basis. On the basis of a complaint submitted by the 6th respondent the WP(C).27745/2011 2 police registered crime No.1045/11 of Anchal Police Station. The attendance of the petitioner may be required in connection with the investigation into that crime where the petitioner's brother figures as the accused. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew our attention to Ext.P7 series of photographs. He submitted that the crime referred to by the learned Government Pleader was registered only after this writ petition was instituted by the petitioner. He submitted that Ext.P7 series of photographs will show that the police is giving assistance to the party respondents for demarcating the boundary of the property in dispute when civil court is in seizin of the matter. We enquired of Sri. Aboobacker as to whether the police who are respondents in this writ petition have any intention to intervene in the civil dispute and the Government Pleader answered in the negative. But he submitted that the attendance of the petitioner may be required in connection with the investigation into the crime already registered. 2. Having considered the rival submissions addressed at the bar we are of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with the following directions. WP(C).27745/2011 3 Respondent Nos.3 to 5 are directed that they shall not intervene in the dispute between the petitioner and the 6th respondent in respect of the property in question. The Munsiff Court, Punalur is already in seizin of the issue in OS.No.69/2010. We record the assurance given by the Government Pleader in this behalf. Coming to investigation into crime No.1045/11 we notice that as of now it is only the petitioner's brother who is the accused. If the attendance of the petitioner is required in connection with the investigation into that crime the petitioner will be given notice under section 160 of the Cr.P.C. If during the course of investigation it becomes necessary to array the petitioner as an accused and to arrest him, the police shall abide by the procedure under section 41A to 41D as per the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court and this court from time to time. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C).27745/2011 4