IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2010 / 7TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 22183 of 2010(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.G.RAVI, MADAPPALLY HOUSE, PAYYAPPADI, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.SUNIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM EAST. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI.T.K. VIPIN DAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 22183 of 2010 W - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The petitioner has approached this court seeking the following relief: “to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order of this Honourable Court directing the respondents to stop every sort of surveillance put on the petitioner, including the periodical domiciliary visits and the local enquiries, and remove his name from the history list or such other list or registers kept for the purpose of keeping surveillance.” 2. Briefly the case of the petitioner is as follows. Petitioner, who is aged 60 years, is residing with his wife and W.P.(C).No. 22183 of 2010 2 children. They are conducting a small provision shop near their house. He is conducting a mini lorry also. 3. During 1986, the police had booked the petitioner in three criminal cases. Those cases were registered in quick succession. According to the petitioner, they were false cases. He was acquitted in all the three cases. It is stated that in respect of one of the three cases, the learned C.J.M. convicted him for a lesser offence under Section 379 I.P.C., but the same was set aside by Ext.P3 judgment. Petitioner has not been involved in any other crime before or after the said crimes. It is stated that after the registration of the three cases the police officers included his name in the ex-convict register of Kottayam East Police Station and the police have been making periodical visits to the house of the petitioner and conducting enquiry about him in the locality. Surveillance is still continuing. Due to this the neighbours are keeping some distance from the petitioner and his W.P.(C).No. 22183 of 2010 3 family members. Frequent visits of the police is affecting his privacy also. 4. As directed by this Court, a statement has been filed by the S.I. of Police, Kottayam East Police Station, wherein, after referring to the three cases mentioned above, it is stated that the name of the petitioner was entered in the Local Ex-convict check register. It is further stated that recently there were many theft cases reported in and around Kottayam District. Therefore the Superintendent of Police, Kottayam instructed every police officers to check and verify the complicity of ex-convicts residing within the limits of all Police Stations in Kottayam. As a result of the same, a police officer enquired into the present doings of the petitioner with the neighbours, whose names are mentioned in the statement. It is stated that the police officer came to know that the petitioner is leading a decent life as a driver. It is further stated that no police officer from Kottayam East W.P.(C).No. 22183 of 2010 4 Police Station never tried or trying to harass or keeping surveillance on the petitioner. 5. We heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that having been acquitted in the criminal cases, there is no justification in the continued retention of the petitioner's name in the ex-convict register. 7. Learned Government Pleader submits that it is revealed that the petitioner is leading a decent life, but surveillance is done on the basis of the direction given by the Superintendent of Police. 8. We take on record the statement filed and also the submission of the learned Government Pleader. 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, we dispose of the Writ Petition directing that if the petitioner files a representation before the second respondent about the retention of his name in the ex-convict register within a period of three weeks from the W.P.(C).No. 22183 of 2010 5 date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the second respondent will consider and take a decision on the same in accordance with law within a further period of one month from the date of filing of the representation. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm