Asokan v. Superintendent Of Police Kottayam
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 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/25TH KARTHIKA, 1937 WP(C).No. 33965 of 2015 (U) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :
---------------- ASOKAN, AGED 51 YEARS S/O. BHASKARAN, RESIDING AT KOOMBEL HOUSE CHEMPU VILLAGE, CHEMPU P.O, VAIKOM KOTTAYAM BY ADVS.SMT.LISY T.SKARIA SMT.VINEETHA NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS :
--------------------
1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM KOTTAYAM 686 001
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIKOM POLICE STATION, VAIKOM 686 141
3. GEETHA JAYAN, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS W/O.LATE JAYAN, NIKARTHIL HOUSE, CHEMPU VILLAGE CHEMPU P.O, VAIKOM 686 608 R1 & R2 BY STATE ATTORNEY, SRI.P. VIJAYARARAGHAVAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 33965 of 2015 (U) -------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :
------------------------------ EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 26-10-2015 WITH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :
------------------------------- NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE
ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J. & A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 33965 OF 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of November, 2015
JUDGMENT
Ashok Bhushan, C.J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Attorney. No notice is being issued to the 3rd respondent in view of the order which is being passed.
2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging police harassment. Petitioner's case is that at the instance of 3rd respondent, the petitioner, his wife and his teenage daughter have been asked to stand in the police station for quite a long time.
3. Learned State Attorney after obtaining instructions submits that a complaint has been received from the 3rd respondent and hence the petitioner was called and a crime has already been registered against the petitioner. It is submitted that only the petitioner was called and neither his wife nor the daughter was called to the police station.
WP(C) No. 33965 of 2015 -:2:-
4. Looking to the facts of the present case we are of the view that present is not a case of police harassment and no direction need be issued.
Recording the submission of learned State Attorney, this Writ petition is closed.
Ashok Bhushan, Chief Justice.
A.M. Shaffique, Judge.
ttb/16/11