IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 28TH MARCH 2011 / 7TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 6920 of 2011(L) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ NANDAKUMAR, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. GOVINDHAN, THOTTATHIL HOUSE, POTHUKKARA, CHETTIPADI.P.O., PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM-676 319. BY ADV.SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE, BY ADV. SRI. V.A.JOHNSON VARIKKAPPALLILL, SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM - 676 303. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THANNI, MALAPPURAM - 676 505. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TIRUR, MALAPUPRAM - 676 101. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM - 676 505. 5. VIKAS, AGED 32 YEARS, PUNATHIL VEEDU, ARIYALLUR AMSOM DESOM. 6. PUTHEN VEETTIL MUNEERA, AGED 28 YEARS, W/O. NANDAMMAL, PUTHIYAKATH ABDURAHIMAN, PARAPPANANGADI AMSOM DESOM, CHETTIPADI.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. C.M.CHARISMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.6920/2011 L APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.121/2011 IN O.S.NO.19/2011 OF THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF'S OF PARAPPANANGADI DTD. 087/02/2011. P2: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN O.S.NO.56/2011 IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF'S, PARAPPANANGADI. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 6920 of 2011-L ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioner has come to this Court complaining about harassment by the police. He prays that directions under Art.226 of the Constitution may be issued to ensure that such harassment is put an end to. 2. According to the petitioner, he and the 5th respondent were business partners. The petitioner had borrowed money from the 5th respondent. As security for due repayment of the amount due from the petitioner to the 5th respondent, an assignment deed was executed by the petitioner in favour of the 5th respondent. The petitioner was obliged to go to court and file O.S.No.19/11 to establish his rights over the property so assigned. An application seeking interim relief was also filed; but that has been dismissed now. 3. During the pendency of the proceedings, the 5th respondent had executed a document assigning the said property of the petitioner to the 6th respondent. The 6th respondent has gone to court with O.S.No.56/11. Thus, civil W.P.(C) No. 6920 of 2011 -: 2 :- litigations between the petitioner on the one hand and respondents 5 and 6 on the other are in progress. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is not about the civil litigations or any conduct on the part of respondents 5 and 6. He complains of harassment by the respondents/police officers which, according to him, is at the instance of respondents 5 and 6. The petitioner only wants such harassment to be stopped. He shall prosecute and defend the civil suits appropriately but the police may not be permitted to intervene in the civil disputes and vex and harass the petitioner. This, in short, is the prayer of the petitioner. 5. The 5th respondent is served; but there is no appearance. Service on the 6th respondent is not complete. We are of the opinion that it is unnecessary to wait any longer for appearance of the 6th respondent. We have proceeded to hear the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. The learned Government Pleader submits that the allegation of harassment by the police officials is totally incorrect. It is true that there are civil disputes between the petitioner on the one hand and respondents 5 and 6 on the other. As the disputes are of civil nature, the police do not want to intervene in the civil disputes. It may be recorded unambiguously that the police do not want the petitioner to W.P.(C) No. 6920 of 2011 -: 3 :- appear at the Police Station. No action shall be taken against the petitioner for his involvement in the civil disputes between respondents 5 and 6. This may be recorded and the proceedings may be closed, prays the learned Government Pleader on behalf of the police officials/respondents. 7. Having rendered our anxious consideration to all the relevant inputs, we are satisfied that the undertaking/submission of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 can be recorded and accepted. No further directions do appear to be necessary, in these circumstances. 8. In the result: (a) We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 that the said respondents/police officials shall in no way intervene in the civil disputes between the petitioner on the one hand and respondents 5 and 6 on the other. (b) This writ petition is consequently dismissed. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge