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 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 18297 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. SUNNY, S/O AUGUSTINE, AGED 49 THOTTUMKARA HOUSE, PUTHUVYPU P.O., OCHANTHURUTH, VYPIN. 2. DARMY W/O SUNNY, AGED 40, THOTTUMKARA HOUSE, PUTHUVYPU P.O. OCHANTHURUTH, VYPIN. BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NARACKAL POLICE STATION, 2. BENNY, S/O AUGUSTINE, THOTTUMKARA HOUSE PUTHUVYPU P.O.,OCHANTHURUTH, VYPIN. 3. RENNY,S/O AUGUSTINE, THOTTUMKARA HOUSE, PUTHUVYPU P.O., OCHANTHURUTH, VYPIN. BY ADV. SRI.C.T.JESTIN FOR R2 & 3 GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.18297/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT BEARINGNO.98/2008 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, KOCHI. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RATION CARD BEARING NO.1735039599. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.18297 OF 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ The petitioners are husband and wife. The respondents 2 and 3 are the brothers of the 1st petitioner. The 1st petitioner has filed O.S.No.98/2008 against the 3rd respondent for declaration of title and recovery of possession of a property. While so, the 2nd respondent filed a complaint before the 1st respondent, Sub Inspector of Police, alleging that he is in need of the family ration card and it is not being given to him. Thereupon, the 1st respondent telephoned the 2nd petitioner on 16.6.2008 and enquired about the 1st petitioner. When she told that he is away in connection with his employment, the Sub Inspector of Police allegedly threatened her, stating that if the 1st petitioner does not appear before the police station, the consequences will be unpredictable. So, the petitioners filed this writ petition on 17.6.2008 seeking the following relief: i) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent not to harass the petitioners without any cogent reason. 2. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that the 2nd respondent wanted his family ration card, so W.P.(C) No.18297/2008 2 that, he can obtain an income certificate from the Tahsildar, which is necessary for admitting his child in the school. Upon receipt of that petition, the police tried to contact the 1st petitioner to settle the problem. The learned Government Pleader denies the allegation of the petitioners' regarding any harassment. 3. The 2nd respondent submitted that, his petition before the police has nothing to do with the civil dispute pending before the civil court. As evident from Ext.P1 itself, it is a dispute between the 1st petitioner and the 3rd respondent. For getting the ration card he moved the police, it is submitted. 4. We record the submission of the learned Government pleader that the police have no intention to harass the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) ps