Jalasteenal v. District Police Chief
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 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 35820 of 2015 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
----------------------- JALASTEENAL AGED 40 YEARS W/O.SAM, T.C.38/1547, MEENAKOM MELEPAZHAVANADI, CHALAI PO THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.K.RAJESH KANNAN SRI.A.S.SHAMMY RAJ RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, VAZHUTHAKKAD THYCAUD P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014.
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THAMPANOOR POLICE STATION, THYCAUD P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695014.
3. SUNITHA KUMARI AGED 36, D/O.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, T.C.18/1072(2) SARASWATHI VILASOM, PEROORKONAM, THRIKKANNAPURAM ARAMADA P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 032.
R1 & 2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.R. SYAMKIUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 35820 of 2015 (B) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.1986/2015 ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF COURT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL // True Copy // P.A. To Judge sou.
ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J -------------------------------------------------------------- W.P(C). No. 35820 of 2015 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2015
JUDGMENT
Ashok Bhushan, CJ.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. No notice being issued to the third respondent, in view of the order which is being passed.
2. Petitioner has filed this writ petition alleging police harassment. Petitioner's case is that the petitioner is plaintiff in the civil suit, O.S No.1986 of 2015, where the third respondent is the defendant. Allegation is that the third respondent is filing complaint against the petitioner and the second respondent is repeatedly summoning the petitioner to police station.
3. Learned Government Pleader after obtaining instructions submits that the petitioner was never summoned at the police station and in the writ petition also no such date has been given, where it is alleged that petitioner has been summoned.
W.P(C).35820/15
4. There are no materials available on record to come to a conclusion that any police harassment is made to petitioner. We thus are of the view that no case has been made out to issue a direction as prayed for.
The writ petition is closed.
Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE sou.2/12/15 // True Copy //