IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2011 / 11TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25602 of 2011(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PRAMOD K.S,AGED 30 YEARS,S/O.SASI K., KOLLAPPILLIL, RAMAPURAM BAZAR P.O, RAMAPURAM KARA,VELLIYAPPALLY VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KOTTAYAM. 686 001. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALA,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 686 575. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,RAMAPURAM POLICE STATION, RAMAPURAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, 686 576. 4. BABU V.K,ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RAMAPURAM POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 5. RAJAN V.K,S/O.KUMARAN, VARAKUKALAYIL HOUSE, KADANADU P.O,KOLLAPPILLI KARA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 686 576. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. C.M.CHARISMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.25602 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Pius C. Kuriakose, J. No representation for the petitioner in this writ petition where the petitioner seeks directions against the 3rd respondent Sub Inspector of Police, Ramapuram, in respect of what he describes as harassment by 3rd respondent at the instance of 5th respondent. 2. While considering the writ petition for admission we on 27.9.2011 directed the Government Pleader to seek instructions from respondents 3 and 4 as to the correctness of accusations contained in this writ petition. Learned Government Pleader Smt.C.M. Charisma submitted that the attendance of the petitioner in the police station was requested for an enquiry in connection with the complaint submitted by the 5th respondent against the petitioner. The allegation in the complaint was that the petitioner had obstructed a pathway leading to the shop and toilet belonging to the 5th respondent by parking his vehicles. The police only wanted to instruct the petitioner to have these vehicles parked in such a manner as not to obstruct the pathway. Further complaint was that the petitioner caused damages to W.P.(C).25602/11 -2- candy boxes in his rage. The petitioner had destroyed a few candy boxes kept in the shop of the 5th respondent. In connection with an enquiry into the complaint that the police only wanted to instruct the petitioner against indulging in illegal actions. But instead of attending the enquiry the petitioner filed this writ petition with frivolous accusations against the police officers. 3. Having regard to the submissions addressed by the Government Pleader we are convinced that no case is made out for issuance of directions sought for. However, we dispose of the writ petition directing respondents 2 and 3 that, in case they require attendance of the petitioner in connection with any investigation or enquiry, they shall do so by issuing notice to the petitioner under Section 160 of Cr.P.C. If it becomes necessary to arrest the petitioner, then the provisions of Section 41A to D of Cr.P.C. and the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court of India regarding arrest shall be strictly complied with. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb