Jinadas vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 22392 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 24634 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          JINADAS, AGED 45 YEARS
          S/O GANGADHARAN,
          RESIDING IN THE ADDRESS
          KULANGARA HOUSE,
          KAIPPAMANGALAM VILLAGE DESOM, KAIPAMANGALAM P.O,
          THRISSUR DISTRICT-680681.

          BY ADV G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)


RESPONDENTS:
     1     STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
           HOME DEPARTMENT,
           GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
           PIN-695001.

    2     THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
          KAIPAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, KAIPAMANGALAM P.O,
          THRISSUR DISTRICT-680681.

    3     PRABIN
          CIVIL POLICE OFFICER, KAIPAMANGALAM POLICE STATION,
          KAIPAMANGALAM P.O,
          THRISSUR DISTRICT-680681.

    4     DEEPA
          AGED 45 YEARS
          W/O MANILAL,
          RESIDING IN HE ADDRESS, PERUMPADAPIL HOUSE,
          KAIPAMANGALAM P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680681.

          SRI.E C.BINEESH - GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 24634 OF 2021
                                       2



                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner alleges that he is being

harassed by the 3rd respondent, who is a Civil

Police Officer, under the influence of the 4th

respondent. The petitioner says that he and

the 4th respondent had entered into an

agreement of sale, over which certain disputes

have arisen but that there is no element of

criminal culpability involved it; and

consequently, asserts that no Police Officer

could have involved himself in such disputes

between the parties. He, therefore, prays that

respondents 2 and 3 be directed not to harass

him any further, by summoning him to the

police station.

2. However, the learned Government

Pleader - Sri.E.C.Bineesh appearing for

respondents 1 and 2, submitted that the WP(C) NO. 24634 OF 2021

petitioner was only summoned to the police

station when a complaint from the 4th

respondent was received, but that he has been

yet found liable to be arrayed as an accused,

though further investigation is till going on.

He submitted that, therefore, the allegation

of the petitioner, of harassment at the hands

of the 3rd respondent, is completely without

basis.

3. When I hear the learned Government

Pleader as afore, it is clear that if there is

a valid reason for the police to cause

investigation, they cannot be impeded by this

Court, on the mere allegation of the

petitioner of being put to harassment.

However, since the learned Government Pleader

says that he is not arrayed as an accused in

any Crime until now, I am of the view that

directions are required to be issued to the

effect that he can be summoned to the police WP(C) NO. 24634 OF 2021

station only after issuing him a notice under

the provisions of the Code of Criminal

Procedure.

Resultantly, I allow this writ petition,

to the limited extent of directing respondents

2 and 3 to summon the petitioner to the police

station - based on any complaint filed, or to

be filed by the 4th respondent - only after

issuing him a proper notice under Section 41A

of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE SAS/09/11/2021 WP(C) NO. 24634 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24634/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS 149 OF 21 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA DATED 23.09.21.