Kerala High Court
Dhanya N.R vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 19 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 28TH KARTHIKA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 20666 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
MRS. DHANYA N.R
AGED 36 YEARS
W/O MR. MEGHANATH, 23/937, VAISANARUPARAMBU, PALLURUTHY,
KOCHI, PIN-682 006.
BY ADV INNOCENT FRANCIS PAPALI
RESPONDENTS:
1 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 018.
2 INSPECTOR OF POLICE
ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 018.
3 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
4 REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, KOCHI,
PIN-682 030.
5 MR. ABDUL KHADAR,
S/O MR. MOYDEEN, VALLOPPILLY HOUSE, PALLIKARA, KUMARAPURAM,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-683 565.
SRI.E C.BINEESH - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.11.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
W.P.(C)No. 20666 of 2021
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 19th day of November, 2021.
The petitioner says that she is the operator of a
Stage Carriage, as is evident from Ext.P1; and alleges
that she and her employees are being threatened and
obstructed from carrying on their operations by the 5 th
respondent, who is also a similar operator. The
petitioner says that in spite of this, the 1st respondent -
Police Officer, summoned her into the police station
repeatedly and forced her to accede to the illegal
demands of the 5th respondent; and she, therefore,
prays he be directed not to do so.
2. In response, Sri.E.C.Bineesh - learned
Government Pleader, submitted that every allegation in
this writ petition made against the police Authorities are
W.P.(C)No. 20666 of 2021
unfounded and without basis because, on a complaint
received from the 5th respondent, they only caused an
investigation, for which purpose, the petitioner was
summoned to the police station. He then added that
neither is the petitioner arrayed an accused in any crime,
nor is any investigation now being continued against her.
3. I notice from the files of this case that even
though summons from this Court have been validly
served on 5th respondent he has chosen not to present in
person or to be represented through counsel;
inferentially guiding me to the impression that he has
nothing to offer in answer to the assertions of the
petitioner.
Taking note of the afore and in particular the afore
submissions of the learned Government Pleader and
recording the same, I close this writ petition, however,
with a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to summon the
W.P.(C)No. 20666 of 2021
petitioner in future to the police station, if it become so
warranted on the basis of any complaint made by or to
be made by the 5th respondent, only after issuing her a
notice under Section 41(A) of the code of Criminal
Procedure.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
Raj/22.11.2021.
W.P.(C)No. 20666 of 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20666/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE STAGE CARRIAGE PERMIT
NO P.ST 7/35/2004 DATED 12.7.2019 OF
THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TIME SCHEDULE OF THE
VEHICLE OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY
THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
ERNAKULAM
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
03.09.2021 LODGED BY THE
EMPLOYEE/MANAGER OF THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF
POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION,
ERNAKULAM
Exhibit P4 ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P3
COMPLAINT DATED 3.9.2021
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
RECEIPT DATED 03.09.2021 OF EXHIBIT P3
COMPLAINT, ISSUED BY CITY POLICE
OFFICE, KOCHI
