IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 311 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------- PATHIYANATHAN, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.ARULAN, HOUSE NO.93, SEERADUM SELVI, PALAIYUR, PUDUKKOTTAI TALUK, TAMILNADU. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CITY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------ W.P(Crl.) No.311 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, who is the father of one Arokiyadoss, aged 39 years and resident of Puthukkottai in Tamil Nadu. The petitioner submitted that his son, the alleged detenu, was being illegally detained by the police at Kozhikode. 2. Notice was ordered to the respondents. The learned Government Pleader took notice for the respondents and taking instructions submitted that the alleged detenu is arrested as an accused in crime No.337/09 of Feroke police station in Kozhikode district on 04/08/2009 and has been produced before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction on 05/08/2009. 3. This petition was filed on 04/08/2009 and it is the submission of the learned Government Pleader that even before information about filing of this writ petition was received by the respondents, the arrest of the alleged detenu had been recorded. The learned counsel for the petitioner has a further grievance that the alleged detenu/accused was illegally detained for a long period of time prior to the recording of the arrest and assaulted while in such W.P(Crl.) No.311 of 2009 2 custody contrary to the provisions of law and binding precedents of the Supreme Court. 4. It is not necessary for us now to go into those disputes. It is now evident that the detention of the alleged detenu is authorised by law, he having been formally arrested on 04/08/2009 and produced before the learned Magistrate for remand on 05/08/2009. We do not express any opinion on the grievances raised by the petitioner about prior taking into custody of the alleged detenu and the alleged improper torture/assault of the alleged detenu. We need only mention that all contentions and pleas which the petitioner and his son have under law can be raised and agitated before appropriate courts. The dismissal of this writ petition will not in any way fetter the rights of the petitioner or his son to complain about the alleged infraction of the provisions of law and the non-observance of binding directions of the Apex court. The learned Government Pleader, of course, denies the allegation of prior taking into custody and the assault/torture of the alleged detenu. 5. This writ petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above observations. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) W.P(Crl.) No.311 of 2009 3 jsr/-