IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2011 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 31826 of 2011(C) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ RANJINI VIJAY, ROHITH HOUSE, PERUNNA WEST, PANCHIKAVU P.O., CHANGANACHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTHAMANGALAM, PIN 686 691. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTHAMANGALAM, PIN 686 691. 3. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, (SOUTHERN ZONE), ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 011. 4. P.J.JOHN, 'MERCY BHAVAN', KODUKULANJI MURI, ALA VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN 689 121. 5. DIVYA JOHN, D/O.P.J.JOHN, 'MERCY BHAVAN', KODUKULANJI MURI, ALA VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN 689121. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.SHYSON MANGUZHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/12/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 31826 of 2011(C) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DT.23/03/10. EXT.P1(a):- TRUE COPY OF the RECEIPT DATED 25/03/10 EXT.P1(b):- TRUE COPY OF the RECEIPT DATED 04/12/09. EXT.P1(c):- TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT (BILL) DATED 23/03/10. EXT.P1(d):- TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT (CASUALTY CHARGES) DATED 23/03/10. EXT.P1(e):- TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT (CASUALTY CHARGES) DTED 23/03/10. EXT.P1(f):- TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT (CASUALTY CHARGES) DATED 23/03/10 EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISUED BY DOCTOR AT ST. JOSEPH'S HOSPITAL, KOTHAMANGALAM DATED 05/05/11. EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF the COMPLAINT DATED 24/02/11 FILED BY 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FILED BY DY. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, (CRIME DETACHMENT) ERNAKULAM RURAL DATED NIL. EXT.P5:- TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE DY. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, (CRIME DETACHMENT) ERNAKULAM RURAL DATED 01/08/11. EXT.P6:- TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF PRINCIPAL INDIRA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF DENTAL SCIENCES TO THE REGISTRAR DATED 26/03/11 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.31826 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose The petitioner, a student of BDS in the Indira Gandhi Institute (college) of Dental Science, Kothamangalam complains that at the instance of respondents 4 and 5 and particularly the 4th respondent who is the father of the 5th respondent, respondents 1 and 2 respectively the Circle Inspector of Police and Sub Inspector of Police, Kothamangalam are harassing her. 2. On considering the Writ Petition for admission, we directed the State Attorney who took notice to seek instructions. Today Sri.Shyson D. Manguzha, the learned Government Pleader on behalf of the State Attorney submitted that the accusations of harassment levelled against respondents 1 and 2 are incorrect. On the basis of a complaint received from respondents 4 and 5, the police in W. P. C. No.31826 of 2011 -2- the first instance registered crime under Sections 323, 363 and 506(2) against the petitioner. The petitioner's attendance was required only in connection with the investigation into that crime. Now finally on the basis of Ext.P4 report, the investigation was dropped. However, it is now learnt that a re-investigation into the crime is being conducted by the Superintendent of Police. The learned Government Pleader requested time to get further instructions regarding the status of the re-investigation. 3. Sri.P.Haridas, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the State Attorney has not been posted with the whole facts. According to Sri.Haridas, the petitioner and the 5th respondent were hostel mates and thick friends in the Dental College. There was some unusual intimacy between the two girls and the 4th respondent which affected the studies of the 5th respondent seriously. The 5th respondent had to discontinue the studies. This antagonized the 4th respondent, father of the 5th respondent and he started pestering the petitioner demanding the capitation money W. P. C. No.31826 of 2011 -3- which he had paid in the beginning for admitting the 5th respondent in the Dental College. The unwillingness of the petitioner to pay the money demanded by the 4th respondent is the reason why the 4th respondent filed complaint against the petitioner. The complaint is frivolous. 4. Having considered the rival submissions addressed at the Bar, we are of the view that it is not necessary that we examine the real reason for the bad blood between the petitioner and respondents 4 and 5. The question which we are called upon to decide is whether there is any warrant for issuance of directions against police harassment. According to us, no case is made out for issuance of any such directions. At the same time, we dispose of the Writ Petition directing respondents 1 to 3 or any other officer investigating into crime registered against the petitioner to issue notice to the petitioner and respondents 4 and 5 under Section 160 Cr.P.C if their attendance is required in connection with the investigation. Moreover, there will be a further direction that if the petitioner is to be questioned, W. P. C. No.31826 of 2011 -4- she will be questioned and her statement will be recorded in the police station or in her residence and that too in the presence of two women police constables. The police shall not visit the college where the petitioner is studying or the hostel where the petitioner is staying in connection with the investigation. The statement of the petitioner will be recorded in the police station or in her residence and that too in the presence of two women police constables. Sd/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE Sd/- K. HARILAL JUDGE kns/- //True Copy// P. A. TO JUDGE