IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933 RP.No. 492 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.14920/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SANTHOSH ANTONY, S/O.ANTONY,POOVELIKUNNEL HOUSE,MELAZHUTHA KARA KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, IDUKKI AT PAINAVU, IDUKKI DISTRICT,PIN-685603 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM-686001 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEERMEDU,IDUKKI DISTRICT,PIN-685531 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANJIRAPPALLY,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,PIN-686507 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT,PIN-685612 6. K.T.SEBASTIAN @ DEVASSIA, S/O.THOMAS,KANDATHINKARA HOUSE, KUTTIKKANAM KARA,PEERMEDU TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT,PIN-685531 ......2 -: 2 :- 7. KUNJAMMA SEBASTIAN, W/O.SEBASTIAN @ DEVASSIA KANDATHINKARA HOUSE,KUTTIKANAM KARA, PEERMEDU TALUK,IDUKKI DISTRICT,PIN-685531 8. RAJEEV @ GOONDA RAJEEV, S/O.PUSHPANGATHAN, BHAMA BHAVANAM, KUMARANELLOOR KARA,KOTTAYAM,PIN-686016 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- R.P. No.492 of 2011 in W.P.(C) No. 14920 of 2011-L ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of July, 2011 ORDER Basant,J. In this review petition, the petitioner, who is the writ petitioner in W.P.(c) No.14920/11, feels aggrieved by certain observations made in the judgment dated 9/6/11 and prays that the said observations which are factually incorrect may be deleted. This is the short prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In paragraph-3 of the judgment dated 9/6/11 the following observations appear and the learned counsel for the petitioner is aggrieved by the said observations: R.P. No.492 of 2011 -: 2 :- “The learned Government Pleader submits that in the perception of the police, there is no threat to the life or person of the petitioner. There are crimes and counter crimes registered. Investigation is in progress.” 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out and the learned Government Pleader now graciously accepts the mistake that has crept in. There is no crime ever registered against the petitioner. That observation is incorrect. The learned Government Pleader accepts the same and has filed a statement to that effect. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that this review petition deserves to be allowed. 4. The result of the petition does not deserve any alteration. But we are certainly satisfied that the above observations which have crept into paragraph-3 of the judgment on the basis of incorrect statements made at the Bar by the learned Government Pleader deserve to be recalled and vacated. 5. This petition is accordingly allowed. The observation in paragraph-3 of the judgment that “there are crimes and counter crimes registered” is vacated accepting the submission of the R.P. No.492 of 2011 -: 3 :- learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader that there is no crime whatsoever registered against the petitioner. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge