IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2008 / 24TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 28636 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ELIAS A.I., S/O ITTOOP, AGED 47 YEARS, ARIEKKAL HOUSE, KEEKKAVUKARA, VAPPALASSERY P.O., NEDUMBASSERY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO SRI.S.SURAJ (KARUNAGAPPALLY) SMT.ANJU JAHAFER RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, RURAL, ALUVA. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALUVA. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGAMANADU POLICE STATION. BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SHRI BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.28636 OF 2008 H ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that he is being unnecessarily harassed and physically tortured by the 3rd respondent in connection with the investigation into a crime registered by the Chengamanad Police. The crime relates to the damage caused to two churches. The petitioner informed the Sub Inspector of Police, Chengamanad that on his way back home at 3 AM on 21.9.2008, he saw a person sitting in the chapel near to the Airport under suspicious circumstances. The petitioner now regrets for having given that information. He is being incessantly called to the Police Station and harassed, it is submitted. He alleges, he was subjected to physical torture by hanging him using a rope and hook attached to the roof of the Police Station Building. In view of the said alleged torture and harassment, the petitioner has preferred this Writ Petition, seeking appropriate directions against the respondents not to harass him. 2. The 2nd respondent, Deputy Superintendent of Police has filed a statement denying all the allegations of the petitioner. On W.P.(C)No.28636/08 -2- questioning, it was found that the statement given by the petitioner is contradicted by others questioned. So, the petitioner has to be questioned again. They have not harassed the petitioner and they have no intention to harass the petitioner also, it is submitted. He being the only person who has some knowledge about the offence committed, his presence is required, it is submitted. 3. Having regard to the allegations of the petitioner, we feel that interest of justice will be met, if the petitioner's lawyer is allowed to be present, when he is questioned. The Police Officer concerned shall issue notice to the petitioner, if his presence is required, under Section 160 Cr.P.C. If the petitioner is able to find a lawyer to accompany him, such lawyer shall be allowed to be present while he is questioned. This direction is issued by us following the judgment of the Apex Court in Nandini Satpathy v. P.L.Dani (AIR 1978 SC 1025). The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn