Sarath M.S vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 9194 Ker

Kerala High Court

Sarath M.S vs State Of Kerala on 3 April, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946
                       WP(C) NO. 12918 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

          SARATH M.S., AGED 49 YEARS
          S/O C.SUKUMARAN, SREEVARDHANAM AMBALAPPUZHA, NEAR S.B.T
          KARUMADI ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688561

          BY ADVS.
          R.ROHITH
          HARISHMA P. THAMPI



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HOME
          DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, SOUTH BLOCK,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

    2     DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
          STATE POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, VELLAYAMBALAM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010

    3     CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER
          OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE POLICE GROUND, CV
          RAMAN PILLAI ROAD, PANAVILA, THYCAUD,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695014

    4     DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, CIVIL
          STATION ALAPPUZHA - 688012

    5     DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
          OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
          KODIVEEDU, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688001

    6     STATION HOUSE OFFICER, AMBALAPPUZHA POLICE STATION,
          ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688563

    7     STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MUSEUM POLICE STATION,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695033

    8     AGNEL ABRAHAM, T.C 14/1630, PARADISE,
          B14 FOREST OFFICE LANE VAZHUTHACAUD, THYCADU P.O,
 WP(C) NO. 12918 OF 2024
                                        2


             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695014

     9       JESTIN, T.C 14/1630, PARADISE, B14 FOREST OFFICE
             LANE VAZHUTHACAUD, THYCADU P.O,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014

             SRI PM SHAMEER-GP


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   03.04.2024,     THE   COURT   ON       THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 12918 OF 2024
                                  3


                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner says that he is being threatened and

intimidated by respondents 8 and 9; and that, under their

influence, the police is harassing him by continually summoning

to the police station. He says that he has, therefore, preferred

Exts.P1 to P5 complaints before the various respondents in this

writ petition, but that no action has been taken thereon; thus

constraining him to approach this Court through this writ

petition.

2. Smt.Harishma P.Thampi - learned counsel for the

petitioner, submitted that the disputes between the parties have

its genesis in an offer of sale of a property owned by her client

and that this is only in the civil realm, into which, the police

cannot normally intervene. She, therefore, argued that the action

of the 7th respondent - Station House Officer, is not merely illegal,

but extremely confutative; and thus prayed that the reliefs sought

for in this writ petition be granted.

3. Sri.P.M.Shameer - learned Government Pleader, in

response, submitted that the facts as stated by the petitioner do

not appear to be accurate because, the specific complaint of

respondents 8 and 9 against them is that they have collected WP(C) NO. 12918 OF 2024

certain money, making some promises, but have violated the

same. He added that the said respondents have now filed a

complaint against the petitioner, which is in the process of being

investigated by the 7th respondent and that they were summoned

to the police station only in such regard and not for any

"harassment" as alleged. He thus prayed that this writ petition

be dismissed.

4. It is without doubt from the afore narrative that there

appear to be certain disputes between the petitioner on one side

and respondents 8 and 9 on the other. This Court cannot and will

not enter into the same, nor can the police do so. It is for the

petitioner to invoke other remedies as may be entitled to him for

such purposes.

5. However, as regards the complaint of the petitioner, that

he is being harassed by the 7 th respondent, certainly, no such is

permissible because the said Officer will have to confine himself

to the statutory limits while making investigation into the

complaint by respondents 8 and 9. Since the learned

Government Pleader says that this is all that the said respondent

is now doing, I see no reason to keep this writ petition pending on

the files of this Court any further.

WP(C) NO. 12918 OF 2024

Resultantly, I order this writ petition, recording the afore

submission of the learned Government Pleader; with a

consequential direction to respondents 1 to 7 to ensure that any

investigation carried on into the complaint preferred by

respondents 8 and 9 against the petitioner is only in terms of law

and within the statutory limits, as warranted. No harassment

will be meted out to any of the parties and the investigating

officer will ensure that the investigation is completed as per the

statutory scheme and no other.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 12918 OF 2024

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12918/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.03.2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.03.2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.03.2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.03.2024 FILED BEFORE BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 6THRESPONDENT

Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.03.2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE