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 28TH MAY 2008 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 14865 of 2008(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: PETITIONER ---------------------- THOMAS MATHEW,AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW,EDAKKUDIYIL HOUSE, VELLIKULANGARA P.O., MONODY DESOM,THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. P.VIJAYA BHANU GEORGE THOMAS.M. RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ---------------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUTHUKKAD. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VELLIKULANGARA. 5. RAMAKRISHNAN,S/O.VELAYUDHAN, THAIVALAPPIL HOUSE, KODHUKADAVU DESOM, THIRUMUKKULAM VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 6. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALA,THRISSUR. BY GOVT.PLEADER SHRI BENJAMIN PAUL FOR R1 TO R4 ADV. SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.14865/08 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 10.5.208 BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 12.5.2008 OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.14865 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF MAY, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner entered into an agreement for sale of certain immovable properties to the 5th respondent. The said agreement was entered into by the petitioner on the strength of an agreement executed by him and the land owner, wherein the land owner agreed to sell the property to the petitioner or to his nominee. The petitioner submits, the period of the agreement with the 5th respondent expires only in June. According to the petitioner, the 5th respondent started threatening him for the return of the advance amount paid to him even before the expiry of the period of the agreement. So, he filed Exhibit P1 representation before the Circle Inspector of Police, Mala. The parties were summoned to the Police Station and they were advised to take recourse to the remedies available to them before the civil court to settle the dispute, as evident from Exhibit P2. While so, the 5th respondent moved the first respondent, Superintendent of Police, making complaints against the petitioner. Now, based on that complaint, respondents 2 to 4 are harassing him. The Police have no jurisdiction to interfere in this civil dispute. So seeking a mandamus W.P.(C)No.14865/08 -2- against the Police not to harass him, this writ petition is filed. 2. Learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that the petitioner has cheated the 5th respondent. On the basis of the representation of the 5th respondent, petitioner apprehends some action by the police and in anticipation of such steps from the part of the Police, this writ petition is filed. So far, the Police have not taken any steps against the petitioner, it is submitted. The 5th respondent submitted that the petitioner received Rs.25 lakhs from him agreeing to sell a property near Mangalam Dam. The petitioner wants to wriggle out of that liability and for that purpose, this writ petition is filed. 3. If the Police is registering any crime for cheating against the petitioner and any investigation is conducted, the same shall be done in accordance with law. Having regard to the nature of the dispute between the parties, we feel that no further directions are necessary in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn