IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2010 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 7210 of 2010(Q) -------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.1312/08 OF THRIKKAKKARA POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- PETER MATHEW, AGED 48, PAILY MATHEW, CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOOR KARA, KAKKANAD VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MRP.SHAIJAN JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THRIKKAKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRIKKAKKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. SONY MANUAL, AGED 35, S/O.MANUAL, CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOOR KARA, KAKKANAD VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. I.B.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.C.NO.7210 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated 5th March 2010 JUDGMENT Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to take action against fourth respondent for lodging a false complaint based on which crime No.1312/2008 of Thrikkakara police station was registered and also for a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to take action against fourth respondent based on Exts.P4 and P5 complaints filed before Assistant Commissioner of Police, Thrikkakara and City Police Commissioner, Ernakulam. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Wpc 7210/10 2 Pleader were heard. 3. Argument of the learned counsel is that though by Ext.P2 statement, fourth respondent alleged that he was hit on the head with a stone by the petitioner and inflicted injury and was taken to the hospital and was being treated therein and he was attacked by the petitioner due to previous enmity and based on his statement, Ext.P1 FIR was registered and after investigation Ext.P3 refer report was submitted by Sub Inspector of Police to the effect that allegation of fourth respondent is not correct and he self inflicted the injury and in such circumstances, penal action is to be taken against fourth respondent. It is contended that in spite of Exts.P4 and P5 complaints, no action is taken. Wpc 7210/10 3 4. As rightly pointed out by learned Government Pleader based on Exts.P4 and P5 no action could be taken against fourth respondent. In such circumstances, no direction could be issued as sought for. If petitioner is aggrieved by filing of the information before the police, based on which investigation was conducted, petitioner is at liberty to seek appropriate remedy against fourth respondent. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.