Shali vs District Police Chief (Thrissur ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1996 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 14TH MAGHA, 1944
                     WP(C) NO. 2525 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

         SHALI,
         AGED 36 YEARS
         D/O VIJAYALAKSHMI, THEKKANATH HOUSE,
         ARANATTUKARA, POOTHOLE,
         THRISSUR, PIN - 680004

         BY ADV K.V.SREE VINAYAKAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1    DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (THRISSUR CITY),
         RAMAVARMAPURAM RD, PALLIMOOLA, MANNUMKAD,
         RAMAVARMAPURAM, THRISSUR, KERALA, PIN - 680631
    2    STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
         THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION,
         PATTALAM RD, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR,
         VELIYANNUR, THRISSUR, KERALA, PIN - 680001

         SRI.E.C. BINEESH GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP      FOR
ADMISSION ON 03.02.2023,      THE COURT ON THE SAME       DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.2525 of 2023

                               2




                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2023

The petitioner, who is running a Beauty Parlour in

Aranattukara, Poothole in Thrissur District, has approached

this Court seeking to direct the respondents to ensure that the

petitioner and her employees and customers are not to be

harassed or intimidated by the respondents, except other than

by the process of law.

2. The petitioner states that she is running a Beauty

Parlour. On the basis of some complaint, the 2 nd respondent-

Station House Officer is harassing the petitioner, her

employees and customers. The petitioner is conducting the

Beauty Parlour after obtaining a trade licence from the Local

Self Government Institution. No illegal activities are going on

in the Beauty Parlour. The continued harassment by the

2nd respondent would affect the business of the petitioner and WP(C) No.2525 of 2023

will tarnish the reputation of the petitioner's establishment.

3. Government Pleader entered appearance on behalf

of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The

Government Pleader submitted that certain complaints were

received alleging that a Massage Parlour/Spa is being run by

the petitioner unauthorisedly without obtaining licence.

Enquiries were made and it was found that there are some

doubtful entries in the registers maintained by the petitioner.

The petitioner was asked clarification regarding that.

4. The Government Pleader submitted that the

respondents have no intention to harass either the petitioner

or her employees or customers. The 2nd respondent is only

conducting an investigation in respect of a complaint received.

5. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no

Massage Parlour/Spa being conducted by the petitioner. The

petitioner is running only a Beauty Parlour.

Taking into consideration the facts as stated above, the

writ petition is disposed of directing the 2 nd respondent-Station WP(C) No.2525 of 2023

House Officer not to harass or intimidate the petitioner or her

employees or customers. It is made clear that this will not

restrain the 2nd respondent from gathering any

information/evidence as regards the complaint received

against the petitioner and from proceeding in accordance with

law.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) No.2525 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2525/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER ISSUED BY THE BUILDING OWNER DATED 26.08.2022 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE GRANTED TO THE PETITIONER BY THRISSUR CORPORATION BEARING NUMBER 140170252200362 DATED 15.09.2022 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ISSUED TO LOTUS BEAUTY HUB ALONG WITH THE E-CHALLAN