Sibu.P.Simon v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/4TH KARTHIKA, 1937 WP(C).No. 32359 of 2015 (T) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S) :- ----------------- SIBU.P.SIMON, AGED 36 YEARS S/O.SIMON, PUTHUSSERIL HOUSE, MARADU ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 304.
BY ADVS.SRI.B.R.MURALEEDHARAN SRI.K.K.VINOD SRI.K.V.SURESH RESPONDENT(S) :- ------------------
1. STATION HOUSE OFFICER CHERANELLOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM.
2. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM KOCHI - 682 011.
3. NIBIN FELIX, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.FELIX, KALATHTHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHERIYAMTHURUTH VARAPUZHA, N.PARAVOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
jvt
WP(C).No. 32359 of 2015 (T) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :- ---------------------------- EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAVANTHRA POLICE STATION. EXHIBIT P1(a). COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P1. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :- NIL -------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J & A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
--------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.32359 of 2015 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of October 2015
J U D G M E N T
Shaffique, J.
The petitioner has approached this Court alleging harassment by police. It is stated that he was working as Manager in a finance firm, by name, IKF Ltd. During that period, the 3rd respondent had purchased a vehicle with the financial aid of the said company, which was later sold by him and in that connection the petitioner is being unnecessarily summoned by the police. 2.
Learned Government Pleader on instructions would submit that based on the complaint given by the 3rd respondent, the petitioner was summoned for enquiry. It is alleged that the petitioner has intervened in the selling of the vehicle by the 3rd respondent. But, in the investigation, it was revealed that the 3rd respondent had entrusted the instalment amount to the petitioner, but he did not pay the same to the finance company. Though the petitioner did not appear before the police, the police had summoned him only for investigation in the said complaint.
W.P.(C) No.32359 of 2015 -: 2 :- 3.
Having regard to the fact that the petitioner was summoned for an enquiry into the complaint filed by the 3rd respondent, we do not find any case of police harassment in this case. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE J UDGE Jvt/27.10.2015