IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2011 / 11TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13443 of 2011(E) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- BINOY.T.B., S/O.P.I.BOSE, AGED 32 YEARS,C.C.12/766, THACHODATH HOUSE, PANAYAPPILLY, KOCHI-682002. BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU SRI.B.S.SURAJ KRISHNA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, OFFICE OF DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QURTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE KOCHI CITY, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOCHI CITY, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, MATTANCHERY, ERNAKULAM-682002. 5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE FORT KOCHI, OFFICE OF THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FORT KOCHI, FORT KOCHI-1, ERNAKULAM. 6. K.B.NELSON, KURISINGAL HOUSE,C.C.11/1298 A, ODATHA, FORT KOCHI, KOCHI-682001, ERNAKULAM. 7. ABILASH, ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR OFPOLICE, FORT KOCHI POLICE STATION, KOCHI-1, ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA R6 BY ADVS. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY SRI.T.A.JOY R7 BY ADV. SRI.M.AJAY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.13443 of 2011-E ***************************** Dated this the 1st day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court complaining of harassment by the police officials at the instance of the 6th respondent. 2. The 6th respondent is the landlord and the petitioner is the tenant. There was demand by the 6th respondent that the tenant must surrender possession. An agreement was entered into, but the petitioner has not been able to surrender possession so far. The grievance of the petitioner is that succumbing to the influence of the 6th respondent, police officials are vexing and harassing him with demand to surrender possession. Respondents 1 to 3 are - the State, the Director General of Police and the Commissioner of Police. Respondents 4 and 5 are local police officials. Respondent No.7 is the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police arrayed in his personal name. 3. The 6th respondent has entered appearance through a counsel. It is submitted that the 6th respondent has no intention to physically throw W.P(C) No.13443 of 2011-E 2 the tenant out of possession. There is no substance in the apprehension that the 6th respondent would indulge in unlawful acts against the petitioner, submits the learned counsel for the 6th respondent. 4. The learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 5 and the learned counsel who has entered appearance for the 7th respondent submit that the allegations are baseless. Complaints were received by the police, both from the petitioner and the 6th respondent. They were called to the police station and were advised to resort to proper and orderly civil litigative process. No subsequent complaints were made by the petitioner to the 7th respondent about any harassment. In these circumstances, there is no merit in this petition and the petition may be dismissed, it is prayed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already approached the civil court and an order of injunction has been obtained against forcible eviction of the petitioner by the 6th respondent. 5. We record the submission of the learned counsel on behalf of the 6th respondent that the 6th respondent shall resort only to legal civil process to secure eviction of the petitioner. We record the submission/undertaking of the learned Government W.P(C) No.13443 of 2011-E 3 Pleader on behalf of the police officials and the learned counsel for the 7th respondent that the police shall not in any way interfere in the civil dispute between the petitioner and the 6th respondent regarding the liability of the petitioner to surrender possession. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that no further specific directions are necessary in this Writ Petition. 6, In the result, accepting the submissions of the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel for respondents 6 and 7, this Writ Petition is dismissed as unnecessary now. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/