IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 29461 of 2010(G) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. V.K.BRAHMADAS,AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.VENNAGOTTU KARUPPAN,MANAGING PARTNER, AISWARYA FINANCE PO VENKITANGU,CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. K.A.SOBHAN DAS,AGED 67 YEARS, S/O.AIYYAPPAKUTTY,KAZHUNGIL HOUSE,PO VENKITANGU, CHAVAKKAD,THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. M.P.BHASKARAN,MARAYKATH HOUSE, PO VENKITANGU,CHAVAKKAD,THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.HARIKUMAR SMT.MOLLY KOSHY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,THRISSUR. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR WEST POLICE STATION, AYYANTHOLE,THRISSUR 680 004. 3. V.K.DHARMADAS,S/O.VENNAGOTTU KARUPPAN, PARTNER AISWARYA FINANCE, PO VENKITANGU,CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT RESIDING AT CHAITRAM,ARIMPOOR PO THRISSUR 680 120. R1 & R2 BY ADGP SRI.P.N.SUKUMARAN. R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SREEJITH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.29461 of 2010-G ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 26th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioners have approached this Court aggrieved by their summoning to the Town West Police Station, Thrissur to settle the disputes. 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioners is as follows: The Ist petitioner is the Managing Partner of a firm involved in conducting kuri business. The 3rd respondent is also a partner. The 2nd and 3rd petitioners are members of a Janakiya Committee involved in the settlement of the dues and liabilities of the firm. The 3rd respondent signed an agreement undertaking to repay the outstanding liability against the firm. The 3rd respondent left India after the execution of the agreement and also misappropriated huge amounts belonging to the firm for his personal use. He had acknowledged returning such amounts to the committee. He also transferred his properties in the name of his relatives in order to waive the liability. Now, he has returned from abroad and is trying to evade payment. The 2nd respondent has WPC 29461/2010 -2- summoned the 2nd and 3rd petitioners as well as the Ist petitioner over phone and is threatening them. There is no right for the 2nd respondent Circle Inspector of Police to intervene and to compel the petitioners to settle the civil disputes. 3. A statement is filed by the Circle Inspector of Police, Thrissur. In the statement it is inter alia stated as follows: “ It is submitted that the Ist petitioner Shri.V.K.Brahmadas was summoned to the office of the Circle Inspector of Police, Thrissur West in connection with an enquiry of a petition lodged by Shri.V.K.Dharmadas, S/o. Vennamgot Karuppan, Kaippilly Desom who is also the brother of the petitioner. Shri.V.K.Brahmadas didn't turn up in my office for the enquiry. The allegation raised in the petition that 2nd petitioner, Shri.Sobhan and 3rd petitioner, Shri Bhaskaran were summoned and threatened by police is totally baseless and incorrect. They were not summoned or threatened. In the petition lodged by the 3rd respondent at the office of 2nd respondent, Circle Inspector of Police, West Police Station, he had stated that he was unable to lead a peaceful life due to the threat by his brother Brahmadas and two others. He further stated that he was one of the partners of Ayswarya Finance which was functioning at Venkitangu by his brothers Shri.Brahmadas, Sivadas and Shylaja wife of Brahmadas. The management of the Ayswarya Finance constituted a peoples committee in order to solve out the problem of creditors. The 3rd respondent further stated that during the year 2006, he went abroad WPC 29461/2010 -3- seeking better employment. When he returned to his house in July 2010, Shri.Brahmadas, Sobhanadas and Ratnakaran began to threaten him that the 3rd respondent should realize the entire credits of the Ayswarya Finance, as he had earned sufficient money from his employment, otherwise prepare to face dire consequences including bodily hurt. They also began to instigate the creditors to come to his house for realize their amount. The 3rd respondent had requested in his petition to save him from the threat of the Ist petitioner and Members of People's Committee formed for the conduct of Ayswarya Finance and its creditors.” It is also stated that in the above circumstances the Ist petitioner was summoned. It is only to maintain law and order and to avoid untoward incidents regarding the above matter. 4. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent and also the learned Additional Director General of Prosecution. Learned Additional Director General of Prosecution would submit that petitioners will not be summoned to the police station to settle the dispute with the 3rd respondent. We record the submission and direct that petitioners will not be called to the police station to settle the dispute with the 3rd respondent. We make it clear that, this will not stand in the way of the police interfering in accordance with law if there is WPC 29461/2010 -4- any law and order problem. We also make it clear that, we have not expressed any opinion regarding the merits of the complaint of the petitioners against the 3rd respondent and if the matter comes before any Court/competent forum in a lis between the parties, that Court/forum will be free to decide the matter untrammelled by anything contained in this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS