IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 11TH APRIL 2011 / 21ST CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 9607 of 2011(A) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- PATHUMMA, W/O.KUNJITHU, VAKKATTU HOUSE, P.O.KUTTIPAALA, KAAVUANGALIPADI, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN, SRI.P.G.SURESH, SMT.K.VIDYA, SRI.RAJAN VISHNURAJ. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. *3. THE CHAIRMAN, STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. *(DELETED) * R3 IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER ORDER DATED 28/03/2011 IN WP(C) NO. 9607/2011. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALPAKANCHERY POLICE STATION, KALPAKANCHERY.P.O, MALAPPURAM-676 551. 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VALANCHERY POLICE STATION, VALANCHERY.P.O, MALAPPURAM-676 552. 6. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VALANCHERY, VALANCHERY.P.O, MALAPPURAM-676 552. 7. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTAKAL POLICE STATION, KOTTAKAL.P.O, MALAPPURAM-676 503. R1, R2 & R4 TO R7 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.T.K. VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/04/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 9607 of 2011(A) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22/03/2011 GRANTING ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER'S SON. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.9607 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th April, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court complaining about harassment by the police. According to the petitioner, the police officials appear to be in the search for the son of the petitioner by name Haneefa. To secure the presence of the said Haneefa, the petitioner is being vexed and harassed unnecessarily. This may be stopped. This in short is the prayer. 2. According to the petitioner, petitioner's son is not arrayed as accused in any case. But the police are unnecessarily trying to take him into custody. The petitioner is being harassed as they are not successful in taking the petitioner's son into custody. It is in these circumstances prayed that direction under Article 226 may be issued in favour of the petitioner. 3. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions now submits that the petitioner's son, the said WPC No.9607/2011 2 Haneefa is involved in several crimes of local Police Stations. There is no intention to harass the petitioner at all. Petitioner's son was required in Crime No.71 of 2011 of Valanchery Police Station. He has now been arrested. He is now in custody. It is true that attempts were made to trace the said Haneefa. But it is incorrect to say that the petitioner has been subjected to any vexation or harassment. It may now be recorded that as the petitioner's son Haneefa has now been apprehended, no further attempt shall be made to trace the said Haneefa. The petitioner shall not in any way be harassed or vexed, undertakes the learned Government Pleader on behalf of all the respondents. 4. We have considered all the relevant inputs. The stand taken by the learned Government Pleader reveals that attempt was made earlier to trace the son of the petitioner. He was required to be arrested in connection with pending crimes and in these circumstances, the attempt made to trace the petitioner's son cannot be described to be harassment and vexation against the petitioner. We take note of the submission of the learned WPC No.9607/2011 3 Government Pleader that the said Haneefa has already been arrested and there shall hence be no attempt hereafter to trace the said Haneefa. 5. We are satisfied in these circumstances that the submission of the learned Government Pleader can now be taken note of and recorded and this writ petition can be dismissed. 6. Accepting the submissions of the learned Government Pleader, this writ petition is in these circumstances dismissed. R.BASANT JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/ WPC No.9607/2011 4 R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.9607 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th March, 2011 ORDER Basant, J. The learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset prays that respondent No.3 may now be deleted from the array of parties. Request accepted. Respondent No.3 is WPC No.9607/2011 5 deleted from the array of parties. Heard. Admitted. Notice given and the learned Government Pleader appears for respondents 1, 2 and 4 to 7. Respondent No.3 has already been deleted from the array of parties. The learned Government Pleader shall take instructions. Call on 31.3.2011. R.BASANT JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/