IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2010 / 2ND MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 37723 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SURESH BABU.L, PADAKKASSERY KARROT, VADAKKE NADA, ETTUMANOOR. BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, O/O S.P, KOTTAYAM. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ETTUMANOOR. 4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ETTUMANOOR GROUP, ETTUMANOOR DEVASWOM, ETTUMANOOR. BY ADV. SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC, TDB FOR R4' SRI.K.N.VENUGOPLA PANICKER,SC TDB BYGOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.37723 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to respondents 1 to 3 not to harass the petitioner and not to detain the petitioner in the Police Station unnecessarily. Petitioner had approached this Court earlier by filing W.P.(C) No.6187 of 2009, which ended in Ext.P1 judgment, as per which the stand of the Government is that there is no harassment on part of the police, and the said submission was also recorded. It was further directed in Ext.P1 that in case the petitioner has any such complaint, he can approach the Superintendent of Police, Kottayam, in which case, the matter will be considered in accordance with law. 2. Therefore, if the grievance of the petitioner still stands not redressed, he has only to approach the W.P.(C) No.37723 of 2009 2 Superintendent of Police as directed in Ext.P1 judgment. It is not known whether the petitioner had approached the Superintendent of Police, Kottayam, in term of Ext.P1, since no copy of the complaint, if any, made has been produced and marked in this case. 3. As per the statement filed on behalf of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kottayam, it is stated that the erring officer has already been proceeded with on disciplinary action. The same is recorded. However, if the petitioner has got any grievance, his remedy has already been stated in Ext.P1 judgment. In such circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with this Writ Petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE nj.