IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2009 / 22ND ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18611 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. T.M.MOIDEENKUTTY, THODIMANNIL HOUSE, CHERANI, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DIST. 2. SADIQUALI V.P., S/O.ALI, VATTAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KARUVAMBRAM P.O., MANJERI. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANJERI. 2. THE ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANJERI. 3. JANARDHANAN, "SREESYLAM", MANJERI,(JUNIO R SUPERINTENDENT, MUNSIFF COURT, MANJERI). 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.A.SALIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) No.18611 of 2009 EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROMISSORY NOTE EXECUTED BY THIRD RESPONDENT DT. 5.2.2009. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.18611 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 13th July,2009 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. Alleging police harassment and seeking appropriate direction, this writ petition is filed. According to the petitioners, there are some money transactions with the third respondent who is employed as Junior Superintendent in the office of the Munsiff Court, Manjeri. It is stated that third respondent is known to them and he has also long acquaintance with them. It is stated that there is a promissory note executed by the third respondent in favour of the first petitioner, but the money was not paid. Therefore, to enquire about this, first petitioner went to the house of the third respondent and demanded return of the amount. But the third respondent misbehaved. It is also alleged that he has misused his position and borrowed huge amounts from various sources. When steps were taken by the petitioners for realisation of the said amount, second respondent came to W.P.(C) No.18611 of 2009 2 the house of the first petitioner and asked him to come to the police station for settlement of the dispute. On going there, it was told that third respondent is in accute financial constrain and asked the first petitioner to accept an amount of Rs.10,000/= from the third respondent and to hand over the promissory note to the third respondent. When first petitioner refused, he has been repeatedly asked to come to the police station. According to the petitioners, being a money transaction and dispute of a civil nature, the police is unnecessarily harassing them. 2. The learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the official respondents submits that a complaint has been preferred by the third respondent to the Superintendent of Police, Malappuram, the same has been forwarded to the Station House Officer, and on receipt of the same, Crime No.403/2009 has been registered under Section 447 and other relevant sections of Indian Penal Court, by the Manjeri Police Station. It is further stated that only in connection with the investigation of W.P.(C) No.18611 of 2009 3 the said crime that the police has asked the first petitioner to come to the police station. In the above circumstances, there are no materials on the basis of which it could be said that there is any harassment meted out to the petitioners. Petitioners can resort to other legal remedies available under law. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN , JUDGE. nj.