IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2011 / 13TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17118 of 2011(L) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANIL KUMAR.C.D., AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.DIVAKARAN, CHERUPULLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PUKKADU DESOM,ELAMKUNNAPUZHA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS VARGHESE.K SRI.THOMAS VARGHESE.K RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM RURAL, ERNAKULAM-682 031. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NJARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 505. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NJARAKKAL POLICE STATION, NJARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 505. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.CHARISHMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17118 of 2011(L) -2- APPENDIX PETITIONER's EXTS:- EXT.P1:- COMPLAINT DT.11/04/11. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.17118 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J This Writ Petition under Article 226 has been filed by the petitioner complaining that the respondents 3 and 4 the Circle Inspector of Police, Njarakkal and Sub Inspector of Police Njarakkal are harassing him by conducting illegal searches in his house without registering a crime against him. The prayer in this Writ Petition is for a direction to respondents 3 and 4 not to conduct any illegal searches in the house of the petitioner without any order from a competent court or registering a crime or without any reasonable cause. There is an ancillary prayer to the above prayer that if a legal search is conducted the petitioner shall not be harassed or humiliated. There are two more prayers in the Writ Petition. One is for a direction to the above respondents not to curtail the freedom of the petitioner W. P. C. No.17118 of 2011 -2- ensured by the constitution of India. Another prayer that is made in the Writ Petition is to compel the second respondent/Superintendent of Police, Ernakulam Rural to consider and take action on Ext.P1 complaint submitted by the petitioner's mother complaining of illegal acts by the 3rd respondent. 2. On considering the Writ Petition for admission, the same was admitted on 27/06/11 and the learned Government Pleader who entered appearance on behalf of R1 to R4 sought time to get instructions. Today on the basis of the instructions received, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the allegations leveled in the Writ Petition against respondents 2 to 4 are unfounded. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.400/11 registered by the Njarakkal police under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 506 (1) 427 and 149. The 4th respondent/Sub Inspector investigating the above crime went to the house of the petitioner for arresting the petitioner in connection with the above crime. The 4th respondent was prevented from W. P. C. No.17118 of 2011 -3- arresting the petitioner by the members of the petitioner's family. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner is a perpetual trouble maker (Øncw Ipg¸¡mc³) of Pookkad, Elankunnappuzha, Ernakulam and the endeavour of the police was only to arrest him in connection with Crime No.400/11. The police has not harassed any members of the petitioner's family. Even though Sri.Thomas Kachappally, the learned counsel for the petitioner took exception to the submission of the learned Government Pleader and complained that though Ext.P addressed to the Chief Minister has been served on the higher ups in the police department including the second respondent no action has been taken on the same. The learned Government Pleader has placed before us copy of the written instructions received by her as well as the copy of the first information report in respect of Crime No.400/11 of the Njarakkal Police Station. 3. Having considered the submissions addressed at the Bar and having gone through the FIR in Crime No.400/11 of W. P. C. No.17118 of 2011 -4- Njarakkal Police Station, we are convinced that there is no warrant for granting to the petitioner any of the reliefs sought for in the Writ Petition. The 4th respondent is justified in attempting to arrest the petitioner who is accused in crime No.400/11. We decline the relief sought for and dismiss the Writ Petition. However, we make it clear that the remedies which are available in law to the petitioner as accused in Crime No.400/11 will continue to be available to him. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE P. BHAVADASAN JUDGE kns/-