IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2008 / 22ND SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 20967 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ISMAIL, S/O. IBRAHIM KUTTY THUDAYYATHU PADIKATHIL, MULLASSERI PANMANA P.O., CHAVARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KOLLAM 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHAVARA 3. JOSE, SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE CHAVARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT 4. PRAKASH, S/.O. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI P.P.COTTAGE, ARAYAM, AANAKKOTTOOR .P.O.,KOLLAM. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 20967/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 - A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 18.06.2008. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 20967 OF 2008-U ----------------------------------------- Dated 13th August, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner submits, he is an Arabic Teacher attached to a Madrassa. He paid Rs.85,000/- to one Smt.Latheefa, who promised to arrange a visa for him, to get employment in the Gulf. Since she failed to arrange the employment visa as promised, the petitioner claimed and got refund of Rs.50,000/- out of Rs.85,000/- paid by him. While so, the 4th respondent came forward and claimed that 50% of that amount should be paid to him, because Smt.Latheefa owes some amount to him also. Since the petitioner did not oblige, the 4th respondent came to his house along with the 3rd respondent Sub Inspector of Police on 22.6.2008. The 3rd respondent took him to the Police Station and detained there till late in the night. He was made to sign various papers. Feeling aggrieved by the said harassment from the WPC 20967/2008 2 part of the 3rd respondent, the petitioner preferred Ext.P1 representation before the Director General of Police. Thereafter, this writ petition is filed, seeking appropriate reliefs against the high-handed actions of the 3rd respondent. 2. The 2nd respondent C.I of Police has filed a statement, in which it is submitted that the petitioner received various amounts from one Smt.Kumariamma, one Mr.Jain and another Mr.G.Jayachandran, promising to arrange employment visa for them. He was acting as a middleman for the aforementioned Smt.Latheefa. Since the said Smt.Latheefa failed to arrange employment visa for them, the petitioner claimed and got refund of a portion of the amounts paid by those persons. Instead of paying it to the persons from whom he received the money, he tried to appropriate it. On coming to know of the same, the aforementioned Smt. Kumariamma, Mr. Jain and Mr.G.Jayachandran filed complaints before the 3rd respondent. Smt.Kumariamma is the wife of the 4th respondent. In the above background the petitioner was summoned to the Police Station to enquire into their complaints. The allegations of harassment etc., are WPC 20967/2008 3 denied by the 2nd respondent. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and counter allegations, we feel that this is not a fit case where this Court should invoke its discretionary jurisdiction and issue directions in favour of the petitioner. He may work out his remedies available to him before the civil and criminal courts. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner and his right to move other forums for appropriate reliefs. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. Nm/