Murali P. K vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 9244 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                  WP(C).No.2651 OF 2021(F)


PETITIONER :

             MURALI P. K.
             AGED 66 YEARS
             S/O. LATE KERALA VARMA, PATTERIL KOVILAKAM,
             POOTHOLE P. O., THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680004.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.A.C.DEVY
             SRI.A.M.ABDULLA
             SRI.K.R.RAMISH

RESPONDENTS:

     1       STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT
             OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

     2       CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
             KORATTY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN
             - 680 308.

     3       SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
             KORATTY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN
             - 680 308.

             R1-3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI SUNIL NATH N.B

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP             FOR
ADMISSION ON 19.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME             DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                               -2-
WP(C).No.2651 OF 2021(F)

                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article

226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus

commanding respondents 2 and 3 not to harass him and his

family members at the influence of some influential persons.

The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus

commanding respondents 2 and 3 not to take any action

against the petitioner on the basis of any frivolous complaint

made by some influential persons. The document marked as

Ext.P1 is an agreement dated 30.10.2020 executed between

Smt.Usha P.K., who is the sister of the petitioner, with six

others.

2. On 02.02.2021, when this writ petition came up for

admission, the learned Government Pleader was directed to

get instructions.

3. The 2nd respondent has filed a statement on

05.03.2021, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ

petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

WP(C).No.2651 OF 2021(F)

also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the

respondents.

5. In Aslam S. and another v. State of Kerala and

others [2011 (2) KHC 384] a Division Bench of this Court,

in a writ petition seeking reliefs alleging police harassment,

held that the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to be invoked

by parties and exercised by the Court only in exceptional

circumstances of grave and imminent danger to the person

applying for such relief, provided, such a situation is shown

and demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Writ Court and it

is shown that the alternate remedies under the Kerala Police

Act, 1960 are resorted to, but remains ineffective or has

turned futile. Such orders cannot be sought for in a routine

manner.

6 In Aslam S., the Division Bench held further that,

even apart from the provisions contained in Section 17E of the

Kerala Police Act, 1960 the law is fairly well settled that every

police officer is duty bound to ensure that he shall act in strict

WP(C).No.2651 OF 2021(F)

conformity with the laws. Firstly, he is a public servant. More

importantly, he is one who belongs to a uniformed force. The

conditions of service of such an establishment oblige the

personnel to act only within the frame work of the

Constitution and the laws. In an establishment with a

hierarchy of officers in administration, every superior officer is

duty bound to ensure that the subordinate does not breach

the law and acts only in strict conformity with the laws. This

has to be so, even by the terms of the Police Act. Therefore, it

is all the more the duty of every superior officer in the police

establishment to attend to any complaint of citizens of any

harassment or other unlawful act by any member of the police

force subordinate to such officer. In this view of the matter

also, the citizens have abundant avenues to bring complaints

before the superior officers in the police establishment.

7. The Kerala Police Act, 2011 contains provisions

similar to that dealt with by the Division Bench in Aslam S.

Section 110 of the said Act deals with the Police Complaints

Authority.

WP(C).No.2651 OF 2021(F)

8. Though in the writ petition, it is alleged that the

harassment from the side of respondents 2 and 3 is at the

instance of certain influential persons, none of those persons

were made parties to this writ petition. Alleging police

harassment from the side of respondents 2 and 3, the

petitioner has not filed any complaint before the superior

police officers or before the Police Complaints Authority. The

petitioner has not made out any exceptional circumstances of

grave and imminent danger to person, as held by the Division

Bench in Aslam S, in order to invoke the extraordinary

jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India.

In such circumstances, this writ petition fails and the

same is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE AV/20/03

WP(C).No.2651 OF 2021(F)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 30.10.2020 BETWEEN USHA P. K. AND OTHER SIX PERSONS.