IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS FRIDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 30TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4002 of 2010(A) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- V.G.MADANAN,AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.GANGADHARAN,VELLADA MURYPEL VEEDU,KADAPPUZHA ERAM,MALAYALAPPUZHA VILLAGE,KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.AJITH MURALI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 4. PODIYAMMA,W/O.LATE VIKRAMAN, MANNPINALAVIL VEEDU,KADAPPUZHA ERAM, MALAYALAPPUZHA VILLAGE,KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SUKUMARAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.4002 of 2010-A ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 19th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner complains about police harassment. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:-- Petitioner is a cooli worker. The 4th respondent's husband and petitioner were friends and also neighbours. The 4th respondent's husband handed over two sovereigns of gold chain to the petitioner for pledging. Petitioner pledged the gold ornament and the amount was given to the 4th respondent's husband. Thereafter, the financier issued a notice to the petitioner demanding him to pay the entire pledged amount stating that in case the amount is not paid the gold chain will be sold in public auction. Petitioner informed the same to the 4th respondent and her husband. But, they did not take any steps in this regard. The respondent's husband died. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that the 4th respondent and her relatives came to his house and asked for gold chain. WPC No.4002/2010 -2- Petitioner approached the financier, but he was told that the pledged article was already sold. Petitioner filed complaint. It is stated that thereafter the 2nd respondent and his party came to the petitioner's house and threatened him and his aged parents and asked them to appear before the 2nd respondent's office. It is stated that petitioner was compelled to return back the gold chain to the 4th respondent and was forced to sign some documents. The 2nd respondent directed the petitioner to give back the gold chain to the 4th respondent within a month otherwise he was told that he will be falsely implicated in criminal cases. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. The learned Government Pleader, on instruction, would submit that a complaint is filed by the petitioner and that the petitioner was called to police station in order to dispose of that petition. Learned Government Pleader submits that the petitioner is not harassed and that he will not be harassed over this incident. He submits that no crime is registered. We record this submission of the learned Government Pleader and close WPC No.4002/2010 -3- the writ petition. However, we make it clear that, we are not pronouncing on the claim, if any, of the 4th respondent. We leave it open to the 4th respondent if she has any complaint to ventilate it before appropriate forum. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS