IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 19TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4073 of 2010(Q) ------------------------------------- CMP.NO.937/2010 OF ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (ECONOMIC OFFENCES), ERNAKULAM. .................... PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. SHRI.SOMARAJAN, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.GANGADHARAN, A-204, SHANTHI APARTMENTS, LOUIS LINE, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-20. NOW EMPLOYED AS DEPUTY CHARGEMAN (ELECTRICAL), U AND M DEPARTMENT, COCHIN SHIPYARD, KOCHI-682 015 2. SRI.PRATHAPACHANDRAN, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.A.PADMANABHAN, GURUPREETHI, NURSERY SCHOOL ROAD, VYTTILA, KOCHI-682 015. NOW EMPLOYED AS SENIOR CHARGEMAN (ELECTRICAL), U AND M DEPARTMENT, COCHIN SHIPYARD, KOCHI-682 015. BY ADVS. MR.VIJU THOMAS, SMT.M.MEENA JOHN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SRI.C.V.GOPI, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, SENIOR MEDICAL ATTENDER, MEDICAL CENTRE, COCHIN SHIPYARD, KOCHI-682 015. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SOUTH POLICE STATION, THEVARA. R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. P.A. SALIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P. BHAVADASAN, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 4073 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 8th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to have Ext.P3 order quashed and appropriate direction to be given. 2. Petitioners claim to be the employees of Cochin Shipyard. They were the former Secretary and President of the Cochin Shipyard Staff Co-operative House Construction Society Ltd., a registered body. The second petitioner still continues to be the governing body member of the said society. 3. The complaint is that the 1st respondent, who is in the governing body member, with an ulterior motive to obtain some illegal benefits, is spreading some scandals and making false allegations against the petitioners. It is pointed out that as a part of his evil design, he has been distributing notice containing allegations against the petitioners. According to the petitioners, the 1st W.P.(C) No. 4073/2010 2 respondent has committed offences punishable punishable under section 12 of the Press and Registration of the Books Act and also under section 501 IPC. It is also pointed out that the 1st respondent has threatened them to dire consequences, if they did not meet his illegal demands. According to them, the 1st respondent is publishing notice without mentioning the name of the publisher or the name of the printing press. 4. Aggrieved by the above, they approached Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (Economic Offence), Ernakulam seeking for issuance of a search warrant with a direction to the 2nd respondent to conduct the search in the office of the 1st respondent and to recover the notices printed and stored in the office. Though there are some material before the learned Magistrate above has passed the order of issuance of notice to the 1st respondent making the entire endeavour of the petitioners to have the notices recovered futile. That, according to the petitioners, will cause prejudice to the petitioners. W.P.(C) No. 4073/2010 3 5. The learned Magistrate on going through the records and also the averments thought it fit to issue urgent notice only. I find no error in the order passed by the court below. The writ petition is without merits and it is accordingly dismissed. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. mn.