IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL FRIDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2011 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 31705 of 2011(K) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ 1. MATHEW, S/O.KURUVILA, AGED 56 YEARS, MARIPPURATHU HOUSE, KAYALUMPARA P.O., NADUVIL VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT,PIN-670582. 2. ROSAMMA MATHEW, AGED 52 YEARS, W/O.MATHEW, MARIPPURATHU HOUSE, KAYALUMPARA P.O., NADUVIL VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670582. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.PRASAD RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KANNUR-670001. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUDIYANMALA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT-670582. 3. GOPI, A.S.I.OF POLICE, KUDIYANMALA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT- 670582. 4. PURUSHOTHAMAN, A.S.I.OF POLICE, KUDIYANMALA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT-670582 5. JOSE, S/O.KURUVILA, MARIPPURATHU HOUSE, KAYALUMPARA P.O., NADUVIL VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT,PIN-670582. WP(C).No. 31705 of 2011(K) -2- 6. JOSE, VETTIKKAL HOUSE, KUDIYANMALA P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670582. SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.SHYSON P. MANGUZHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 31705 of 2011(K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09/06/09 IN OS.420/08 BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, THALIPPARAMBA EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 30/01/10 IN I.A.3409/09 AND I.A.3410/09 EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS.432/08 DATED 22/12/10. EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF the FIR IN CRIME NO.223/08 OF KUDIYANMALA POLICE STATION. EXT.P4(a):- TRUE COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE DATED 07/12/08 ISSUED BY THE HOSPITAL AUTHORITIES IN RESPECT OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P4(b):- TRUE COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE DATED 07/12/08 ISSUED BY THE HOSPITAL AUTHORITIES IN RESPECT OF THE SON OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P5:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 17/05/11 FILED BY THE PETITONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 17/05/11 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE POLICE AUTHORITIES. EXT.P7:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15/11/11 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE POLICE AUTHORITIES. EXT.P8:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 21/11/11 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.31705 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose The petitioners-husband and wife, have approached this Court alleging that at the instance of party respondents 5 and 6 who seem to be related to them in some way, the officers of police, particularly R3 and R4 the ASIs of Police who have been arrayed eo nomine are harassing them. The specific allegation is that they are insisting that the petitioners should allow respondents 5 and 6 to transport timber belonging to them through property of the petitioners which is subject matter of the decree in O.S.420/08 of the Thalipparamba Munsiff's court. 2. On considering this Writ Petition for admission we directed the State Attorney who took notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 to seek instructions from the concerned respondents as to the correctness of the accusations of W. P. C. No.31705 of 2011 -2- harassment. On the basis of instructions received, it was submitted by Advocate Sri.Shyson P. Manguzha on behalf of State Attorney that there has been several law and order problems on account of the dispute between the petitioners and the party respondents. Earlier one crime was registered against the petitioners and another one against the party respondents. Both these crimes were charge sheeted after investigation. Cases are pending before the Thalipparamba, JFCM. Recently on 19/11/11 a new crime as Crime No.257/11 was registered against the petitioners. The attendance of the petitioners was required by the police in connection with investigation of that crime. This cannot be branded as harassment. 3. Sri.C.K.Prasad, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is distorted version of facts which has been supplied to the State Attorney by the police. The harassment by respondents 3 and 4 is that they are insisting that the petitioners should allow transportation of unauthorised W. P. C. No.31705 of 2011 -3- timber belonging to the party respondents through the petitioners' property. Such transportation will be in violation of the injunction decrees which the petitioners have in O.S.432/08 and O.S.420/08 of the Thalipparamba Munsiff's Courts. 4. Sri.Shyson P. Manguzha, the learned senior Government Pleader sought for further time to seek instructions from the police officers regarding the above specific allegation of the petitioner. We are not inclined to grant the time. We feel that on the basis of submissions already addressed the Writ Petition can be disposed of issuing the following directions:- The action of the police in insisting on the attendance of the petitioner in connection with enquiry into crime No.257/11 cannot be branded as harassment. We are not issuing any directions against such insistence by police. At the same time, the petitioners complain that respondents 3 and 4 who are police officers are compelling the petitioners W. P. C. No.31705 of 2011 -4- to allow transportation of unauthorised timber by respondents 5 and 6 through the petitioners' property is a serious one. We find that Ext.P8 complaint has been submitted in this regard by the petitioners before the District Police chief. We direct the 1st respondent District Police Chief to take up Ext.P8 and to conduct an enquiry into the same. As part of the enquiry 1st respondent will summon respondents 3 and 4. If the enquiry reveals that respondents Nos.3 and 4 are compelling the petitioners to allow respondent Nos.5 and 6 to transport unauthorised timber through the petitioners' property the 1st respondent will issue peremptory instructions to prevent such compulsions in future. If the compulsions continue it is open to the petitioners to approach the civil court seeking enforcement or execution of the decrees in their favour. It is open to the petitioners to apprise the learned Munsiff of the intervention by respondents 3 and 4 in the matter in which case the learned Munsiff can issue notice to respondents 3 and 4 also W. P. C. No.31705 of 2011 -5- even if they are not parties to the decrees. Sd/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE Sd/- K. HARILAL JUDGE kns/- //True Copy// P. A. TO JUDGE