Albin Chacko vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 18164 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
   FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 12TH BHADRA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 16271 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          ALBIN CHACKO
          AGED 25 YEARS
          S/O. A.M.CHACKO,
          RESIDING AT ANIYAKKATTU HOUSE,
          KADUMENI, CHITTARIKKAL,
          CHITTARIKKAL P.O.,
          KASARAGOD DISTRICT

          BY ADVS.
          T.MADHU
          C.R.SARADAMANI
          SHAHID AZEEZ
          RENJISH S MENON


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
          HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

    2     THE STATE POLICE CHIEF,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA POLICE HQ,
          CV RAMAN PILLAI ROAD, VELLAYAMBALAM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,KERALA-695 010

    3     DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
          KADARAGOD, KASARAGOD P.O.,
          KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 121

    4     THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
          CHITTARIKKAL, CHITTARIKKAL P.O.,
          KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 326

    5     THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
          CHITTARIKKAL POLICE STATION,
          CHITTARIKKAL P.O.,
          KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 326
 WP(C) NO. 16271 OF 2021
                                 2

         BY ADV.
         SRI E.C BINEESH- GOVERNMENT PLEADER

By




THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.09.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 16271 OF 2021
                                  3

                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court with

an allegation that respondents 4 and 5 are

harassing him merely because his elder brother,

Sri.Anto Chacko, is reported to have jumped bail

in a criminal case registered against him by the

Chittarikkal Police Station.

2. The petitioner says that even though his

elder brother was earlier staying in their

ancestoral house - where presently he and the

parents are residing - he is reported to have fled

outside India; and consequently, that the Police

cannot keep on visiting the house and searching

it, under the pretext that they are trying to

locate the accused. The petitioner says that he

is only 26 years of age and that action of the

Police has severely prejudiced his life.

3. The afore allegations of the petitioner

were very vehemently refuted by the learned

Government Pleader, Sri.E.C.Bineesh, saying that

this writ petition has been filed by the WP(C) NO. 16271 OF 2021

petitioner solely to help his elder brother, who

has violated the terms of bail and is evading

consequent arrest. He submitted that the Police,

therefore, have a duty to visit the house of the

petitioner, where his elder brother is also

admitted to have been staying and therefore, that

the petitioner cannot be heard to construe this as

being Police harassment, reiterating that this is

a method being used by him to save and shield his

elder brother.

4. The learned Government Pleader then added

that, in fact, on an earlier occasion, the grand

mother of the accused had approached this Court

seeking anticipatory bail and that this was done

with the confutative motive of helping him. The

learned Government Pleader, therefore, prayed that

this writ petition be dismissed.

5. In reply, the learned counsel for the

petitioner, submitted that it is true that the

elder brother of his client was staying at the

same house, but that he is no longer there and he WP(C) NO. 16271 OF 2021

is reportedly out of India. He asserted that the

whereabouts of the petitioner's brother is not

known to him or his other family members; and

reiteratingly prayed that Police be directed not

to harass him any further.

6. I must say that the allegations of the

petitioner as afore recorded are ones that this

Court cannot access affirmatively, while acting

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The Police certainly have a duty to investigate a

crime, particularly in which the accused is

imputed with offences under Section 376 of the

IPC, along with provisions of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012(the

POCSO). If they have visited the house of the

petitioner in furtherance of the investigation,

especially to locate the accused who is on bail, I

cannot find fault with them; but the Police

certainly must ensure that this does not cause

violation of dignity or privacy of the petitioner

or his other family members.

WP(C) NO. 16271 OF 2021

Resultantly, I close this writ petition with a

direction to the Police Authorities concerned to

cause investigation and to make visits to the

house where the petitioner and his family are now

residing, only following law and in terms of the

protocols that are mandatorily required to be

adhered while making searches and investigations.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/10.9 WP(C) NO. 16271 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16271/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 22.7.2021 SUBMITTED BY MRS.ROSA VARGHESE BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD