Dr. Moushmi C.B vs The City Police Commissioner
2023 Latest Caselaw 4700 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1945
                     WP(C) NO. 9055 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

         DR. MOUSHMI C.B
         AGED 41 YEARS
         W/O SHAMBUNATH, HOUSE NO. 59,
         PUZHAKKARAKKAVU ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN - 686661

         BY ADV L.RAJESH NARAYAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER
         KOCHI CITY, REVENUE TOWER PARK VIEW,
         MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
    2    THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
         MARADU POLICE STATION , MARADU
         ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682304
    3    THE ASSISTANT SUB INPSECTOR
         MARADU POLICE STATION , MARADU
         ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682304
    4    MRS. SHABNAM, AGED 35 YEARS
         D/O RATHNAKARAN 'SHABNAM' PANOLIL, VAYALALAM,
         THIRUVANGADU THALASERRY, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670103

         SRI.E.C. BINEESH, GP
         SRI.P.MOHANDAS

     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP    FOR
ADMISSION ON 12.04.2023,      THE COURT ON THE SAME     DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.9055 of 2023

                               2


                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 12th day of April, 2023

The petitioner is a Doctor by profession and she is

presently working as Associate Professor at Al Azhar Dental

College, Thodupuzha.

2. The petitioner states that the 4 th respondent is the

wife of the petitioner's friend. The said friend and his parents

have been arrayed as accused 1 to 3 in Crime No.1422/2022

of the Maradu Police Station registered under Sections 498A

and 406 of the Indian Penal Code. The crime is on the basis

of a statement given by the 4th respondent.

3. The petitioner would submit that the petitioner has

nothing to do with the said crime. However, respondents 2

and 3 are frequently summoning the petitioner to the Police

Station purportedly for recording statement. Though the

petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the

investigation, the consistent harassment is unbearable.

Unless this Court interferes in the matter and gives WP(C) No.9055 of 2023

appropriate direction to respondents 2 and 3 not to harass the

petitioner, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship,

contends the petitioner.

4. Government Pleader entered appearance and

resisted the writ petition. The Government Pleader pointed out

that a criminal complaint has been registered against accused

1 to 3. Certain information in connection with the investigation

process, is required from the petitioner. The petitioner was

summoned to the police station after issuance of a notice

under Section 160(1) of the Cr.P.C. Respondents 1 to 3 do

not intend to harass the petitioner in any manner.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1

to 3 and the learned counsel for the 4th respondent.

6. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner

is being repeatedly summoned to the Police Station for giving

statement. The statement is not being recorded. Instead, the

petitioner is repeatedly asked to come to the Police Station.

The Government Pleader, on the other hand, would submit WP(C) No.9055 of 2023

that the petitioner is not co-operating with the investigation

process. Even from Ext.P5 reply given by the petitioner, it can

be seen that the petitioner is not co-operating with the

investigation, contends the Government Pleader.

7. If a crime is registered and the police requires

information from the petitioner, the police authorities will be at

liberty to gather the same through legal means. This Court

cannot prevent the police from discharging their duty under

the Cr.P.C.

However, taking into consideration the facts of the case,

the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 to 3

that if presence of the petitioner is required in connection with

the investigation, such presence can be called for, only after

issuing a notice showing the date and time on which the

petitioner shall appear before the Police Station.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) No.9055 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9055/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO. 1422/2022 DATED 09.12.2022 OF THE MARADU POLICE STATION Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.12.2022 IN CRL.MC NO. 2954/2022 OF THE HON'BLE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM Exhibit P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18.1.2023 Exhibit P-4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE U/S 160 CRPC DATED 28.02.2023 Exhibit P-5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 7.3.2023