Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 20312 Ker
Judgement Date : 30 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 8TH ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 20074 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
MOHAMMAD RAFEEK
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O.HAMSA, BAITHUM NOOR (HOUSE), AYANIKKAD P.O.,
VADAKARA, NOW RESIDING AT DOOR NO.5 A, KATTOOR,
KENDAIYUR ROAD, METTUPALAYAM, COIMBATORE, PIN-641305.
BY ADV DENIZEN KOMATH
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
VADAKARA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673504.
3 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
VADAKARA, O/O.VADAKARA BEACH, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673103.
4 AMMAD PANNIYODAN CHARIVATH,
S/O.ABDULLAH PANNIYODAN VELLILADY, MEMUNDA P.O.,
VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE RURAL, PIN-673104.
SRI E C BINEESH - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 20074 OF 2021
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner says that he had entered into an agreement for
sale of a property in Tamilnadu with the 4th respondent and that
certain disputes arose between them relating to it. The petitioner
says that the 4th respondent, thereafter, filed a complaint against
him in a police station in Tamilnadu and thereafter another, on the
same set of allegations, before the Judicial First Class Magistrate.
Vadakara, which led to a Crime being registered against him. He
submits that he has already approached this Court, through
Crl.M.C.No.8033 of 2019 and that all proceedings thereon have
been now stayed.
2. The petitioner, however, alleges that in spite of this,
the respondents - Police Authorities, are still calling him to the
police station and forcing him to settle the disputes with the 4 th
respondent. He asserts that the police Authorities have no
authority to do so, particularly because the aforementioned
disputes are in the realm of civil law. The petitioner, therefore, WP(C) NO. 20074 OF 2021
prays that respondents 2 and 3 be directed not to "harass him" or
to force him to settle the afore said disputes with the 4 th
respondent
3. I have heard Smt.Mereena J. Joseph - learned counsel
for the petitioner and Sri.E.C.Bineesh - learned Government
Pleader appearing for the respondents 2 and 3.
4. I have not issued notice to the 4th respondent, since the
directions that I propose herein will not prejudice him in any
manner whatsoever.
5. Sri.E.C.Bineesh - the learned Government Pleader,
submitted that the police have not intervened in the civil disputes
between the parties, but have only made some enquiry when the
Crime was registered against the petitioner. He submitted that
since the matter has now been stayed by this Court, no further
investigation is being carried on.
In the afore circumstances and taking note of the
submissions of the learned Government Pleader, I allow this writ WP(C) NO. 20074 OF 2021
petition and direct respondents 2 and 3 not to summon the
petitioner to the police station or to cause any inconvenience to
him, except after he is issued with a notice under Section 41A of
the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Needless to say, the 4th respondent will be at full liberty to
pursue his case against the petitioner, notwithstanding the afore
directions, in the Crl.M.C.No.8033/2019 now pending before the
Court; and the directions afore issued shall stand modulated in
adherence to the orders to be issued in the said case.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE SAS/30/09/2021 WP(C) NO. 20074 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20074/2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VADAKARA DATED 15.11.2017.
Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1544/2017 OF 2ND RESPONDENT POLICE STATION.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!