IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2009 / 16TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18754 of 2009(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- TEAM LIFE CARE INSURANCE (INDIA) PVT.LTD., (COMPANY REGD. NO.U66010TZ2004PTCO11387) HAVING ITS OFFICE AT TLC BUILDING, SH AYYAPPA ARCADE, A4 PAMPA EXTENSION, HEBBAL, KEMPAPURA, BANGALORE 560 024, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR.R.KANDAVEL. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH SRI.K.P. NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOCHI CITY, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL STATION, ERNAKULAM GP MR.P A SALIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO.18754 OF 2009-L -------------------------------------------------------- Dated 7th July 2009 Judgment BHAVADASAN, J. The petitioner is a private limited company, registered under the Companies Act, having its registered office at Bangalore. The business of the company was initially confined to Bangalore and Chennai. As the business progressed, branches were opened at several places, including in the State of Kerala. The company claims to be a service provider appointed by 'Bajaj Allianz' for promoting their insurance products. The principal of the company, namely Bajaj Allianz is licensed to conduct insurance business. Various other things are also mentioned about the company, which are not very relevant here. The allegation is that accusing them of indulging in money circulation scheme, the police are continuously visiting their office and calling the employees of the company to the police station. Thus, they are being harassed. As a result, it is difficult for the company to carry on their business in a smooth manner. WP(C) No.18754/09 2 It also affects the reputation of the company. The petitioner company would submit that they are not involved in any clandestine activities and they are doing business in a quite legal manner. 2. The learned Government Pleader pointed out that a complaint has been received against the petitioner company and that is being enquired into by the police. There is no question of any harassment as alleged by the petitioner, it is submitted. 3. The Writ Petition, being one against police harassment, it is unnecessary to go into the veracity of the allegations and counter allegations of the petitioner and the respondents. Admittedly, no crime has been registered and there is no investigation in that regard as such proceeding now, against the petitioner company. 4. Certainly, it is open to the police to enquire into the complaint received by them and as rightly pointed out by the learned Government Pleader, if an investigation is being conducted with regard to any complaint received, it cannot be called as harassment. However, there is nothing to show that WP(C) No.18754/09 3 any crime has been registered. 5. Under the pretext of investigation, certainly the employees of the petitioner company cannot be harassed. It is, therefore, made clear that while the police is at liberty to enquire into the complaint received against the petitioner, in case they want to question the employees of the petitioner company, the Investigating Officer shall issue notice to them as contemplated under S.160 Cr.P.C. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta WP(C) No.18754/09 4