Thadathil Devasia v. District Superintendent Of Police, Kannur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/29TH POUSHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 1317 of 2015 (L) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
-------------- THADATHIL DEVASIA AGED 65 YEARS S/O.ABRAHAM, AYYANKUNNU AMSOM DESOM, ANGADIKADAVU P.O. KILIYANTHARA (VIA), KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN 670706. BY ADV. SRI.RAJU K.MATHEWS RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KANNUR, PIN 670001.
2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE IRITTY, IRITTY P.O., KANNUR PIN 670703.
3. MATHEW THARAYIL SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE O/O.THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, IRITTY IRITTY P.O., KANNUR, PIN 670703.
4. JOSE GEORGE MADATHINAKOM, EDOOR, AYYANKUNNU AMSOM DESOM PAYAM P.O., KANNUR DIST., PIN 670704.
R1 AND R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER C.R.SYAMKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 1317 of 2015 (L) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT-P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.03.2011 IN O.S.NO.218/2007 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT KUTHUPARAMBA. EXHIBIT-P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE BAR COUNCIL OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT-P2(A): A TRUE TRANSLATION OF P2.
EXHIBIT-P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P3(A): A TRUE TRANSLATION OF P3.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------ NIL /TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE
ASHOK BHUSHAN, Ag.CJ & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J ---------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No. 1317 of 2015 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th January, 2015
JUDGMENT
Ashok Bhushan, Ag.CJ.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. No notice is being issued to respondents 3 and 4, in view of the order, which is being passed.
2. By this Writ Petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to respondents 2 and 3 not to interfere in the civil dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent or harass the petitioner's family. The Writ Petition is filed alleging police harassment.
3. The learned Government Pleader, after obtaining instruction, submits that a complaint was received from the fourth respondent against the son of the petitioner. In that connection both the petitioner's son and the fourth respondent were called to the police station. When it was
WP(C).1317/15 revealed from the parties that a civil suit is pending between the parties, the parties were advised to abide by the decision of the Civil Court. It is submitted that the petitioner never came to the police station, although his son was called to appear.
We do not find that it is a case of police harassment. Recording the aforesaid submission by the learned Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is closed. ASHOK BHUSHAN ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE vgs19/1/15