IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH APRIL 2009 / 25TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10784 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- LALITHA BHAI, AGED 57 YEARS, W/O. RAGHUTHAMAN PILLAI, MUKUNDA VILASAM HOUSE, P.O. KULASEKHARAMANGALAM, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.G.SURESH SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN SMT.VIDYA MANU VILSAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIKOM. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIKOM. 5. CHANDRA MOHAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. KUMARAN, ARAYAMPADIKKAL HOUSE, CHEMBU.P.O, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM. 6. RAMESAN, KOOMBAYIL HOUSE, CHEMBU.P.O, VAIKOM. 7. NOUPHEL, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. ISMAIL, RESIDING AT THEKKUM KOVIL CHEMBU.P.O, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MS. M.R. SREELATHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN & ANTONY DOMINIC, JJ. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.10784 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated: APRIL 15, 2009 JUDGMENT Siri Jagan, J. The petitioner alleges that the police is harassing the petitioner, her sister and her sister's children at the instance of the 5th respondent. The allegation of the petitioner is that earlier, the petitioner had entered into an agreement with the 5th respondent for sale of certain properties belonging to the petitioner. The 5th respondent did not comply with his part of the agreement. After the agreement period was over, the 5th respondent came to the petitioner and insisted on the petitioner executing the sale deed as per the original agreement. The petitioner was prepared to execute the sale deed. But in addition, the 5th respondent made certain other demands which she refused to comply with. The petitioner's grievance is that at the instance of the 5th respondent, to compel the petitioner to comply with the illegal demands of the 5th respondent, the police is harassing the petitioner, her sister and her sister's children. W.P.(C) No.10784 of 2009 2 2. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that although a complaint has been received from the 5th respondent, noting that it is in the nature of a civil dispute, no action has been taken on that complaint. However, the petitioner thereafter filed a complaint against the 5th respondent herein, in respect of which action had been taken and the 5th respondent had been called to the police station to warn him against any illegal act. It is further submitted that the police is not harassing the petitioner. In the above circumstances, recording the submission made by the learned Government Pleader that the police is not in any way harassing the petitioner and appropriate action is being taken on the complaint filed by the petitioner, this writ petition is closed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/- W.P.(C) No.10784 of 2009 3