P.A. Aitson @ Antony v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/18TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 11524 of 2015 (M) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S) :- ----------------- P.A. AITSON @ ANTONY, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.ANTONY, PURAMUKALIL HOUSE, KADUVAL, PERUMBAVOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.P.P.BIJU RESPONDENT(S) :- -----------------

1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM RURAL, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 101.

2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE DYSP, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 552.

3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, PERUMBAVOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 552.

4. ALFONSA, W/O.BABY, PALAKARAN HOUSE, PERUMBAVOOR P.O., KANJIRAKKAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 552. R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-042015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt

WP(C).No.11524 OF 2015 APPENDIX Petitioner's Exhibits :- Ext.P1 :- True copy of the complaint dated 8.7.2014 submitted by the petitioner.

Ext.P1(a) :- True copy of the English translation complaint dated 8.7.2014 submitted by the petitioner.

Ext.P2 :- True copy of the lawyer notice dated 18.3.2015. Ext.P2(a) :- True copy of the English translation of lawyer notice dated 18.3.2015.

Ext.P3 :- True copy of the complaint dated 25.3.2015 submitted by the petitioner.

Ext.P3(a) :- True copy of the English translation of complaint dated 25.3.2015 submitted by the petitioner.

Respondent's Exhibits :- NIL.

//True Copy// P.A. to Judge

ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J & A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.

---------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.11524 of 2015 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April 2015

J U D G M E N T

Ashok Bhushan, C.J Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

2.

No notice is required to be issued to 4th respondent, in view of the order being passed in the writ petition. 3.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging police harassment. The petitioner's case in the writ petition is that he has unnecessarily called at the police station and asked to sign in an agreement with 4th respondent. 4.

Learned Government Pleader on instructions would submit that on a complaint received from the 4th respondent, the petitioner was called and after recording the statement of the petitioner, it would reveal that there is financial transaction between the parties. Hence, the complaint has been closed.

W.P.(C) No.11524 of 2015 -: 2 :- In the above view of the matter, we see no reason to pass any further order or entertain the writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is closed.

Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE Jvt