Kerala High Court
Jacob Diarish K T vs State Of Kerala on 5 April, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 8220 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
JACOB DIARISH K T, AGED 44 YEARS,
S/O K L THOMAS, KALLUNGATHARA HOUSE,
NIRAVATH ROAD MARADU,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682304.
BY ADV C.J.VARGHESE VINU
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031.
2 DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (LAW & ORDER)
POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA., PIN - 695010.
3 THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ERNAKULAM,
THE OFFICE OF COMMISIONER OF POLICE
REVENUE TOWER NEAR GOVT LAW COLLEGE
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011.
4 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
REVENUE TOWER NEAR GOVT LAW COLLEGE
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
5 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
OF POLICE, THEVARA ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682013.
6 THE SHO OF POLICE MARADU,
MARADU POLICE STATION
MARADU ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682304.
7 CIVIL POLICE OFFICER MARADU POLICE
STATION, MARADU POLICE STATION
MARADU ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682304.
WP(C) NO. 8220 OF 2024
-2-
BY ADV.
SRI.P.M.SHAMEER, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 8220 OF 2024
-3-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner alleges that he is being
harassed by the Police by being summoned
continuously to the Police Station, with visits
being made to his house also at odd hours. He
concedes that he had been earlier included in
the 'Rowdy List', prepared by the 6th respondent;
and that this was done because there were four
Crimes registered against him in the past. He
asserts that the first among the said Crimes has
been referred to by the Police themselves, after
investigation, finding the imputations to be
without basis; while, two others have ended in
his honourable acquittal, after trial.
2. The petitioner admits that the 4th Crime
is still under trial, but that he has sufficient
materials to have himself exonerated; and hence,
WP(C) NO. 8220 OF 2024
his continuation in the 'Rowdy List' is illegal
and untenable, as also the actions of the
respondents in summoning him as above. He thus
prays that respondents 6 and 7 be directed not
to "harass him" by summoning him into the Police
Station without valid reasons; further impelling
an adscititious plea that the 6th respondent be
directed to remove him from the 'Rowdy List'.
3. Sri.P.S.Shameer - learned Government
Pleader, in response to the afore submissions of
the petitioner, as made by his learned counsel -
Sri.C.J.Varghese Vinu, submitted that the
'Dossier Sheet' of the petitioner has been
produced on record, along with his Memo dated
04.04.2024, wherein, it is evident that he has
been implicated in four Crimes in the past. He
submitted that, however, as stated by the
petitioner, if he has been exonerated in three
of them, it is for him to move the 2nd
WP(C) NO. 8220 OF 2024
respondent appropriately with a representation
to be deleted from the 'Rowdy List'; and that,
if this is done, it can be considered in terms
of law without any avoidable delay.
4. The learned Government Pleader added
that, but, as long as the petitioner continues
to be in the 'Rowdy List', a vigil will have to
be maintained on him, which alone has been done,
but which has now been interpreted by him to be
'harassment'. He thus prayed that this Writ
Petition be dismissed.
5. The afore rival submissions are
recorded.
6. It is luculent that the crux of the
issue is whether the petitioner is now liable to
be continued in the 'Dossier Sheet' maintained
by the 6th respondent under the provisions of the
'Kerala Police Act' ('Act', for short). This
appears to have been done at a time when he was
WP(C) NO. 8220 OF 2024
implicated in four Crimes, but since the learned
Government Pleader himself admits that three of
them have now ended in acquittal or reference by
the Police, the question whether the petitioner
should continue to be so maintained merely
because one Crime is pending trial is something
that the 2nd respondent or such other competent
Authority should consider very carefully. I say
so because, on this, depends the question
whether the petitioner can be continued under a
vigil, which is normally permissible only of
persons who are included in the 'Dossier Sheet'
under the 'Act'.
In the afore circumstances, I allow this
Writ Petition with the following directions:
(a) The petitioner is granted liberty to
move the 2nd respondent or such other competent
Authority for being removed from the 'Dossier
Sheet', prepared by the 6th respondent under the
WP(C) NO. 8220 OF 2024
provisions of the 'Act'; and if this is done
within a period of two weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment, necessary
action will be taken thereon, adverting to the
contentions of the petitioner that he has
already been exonerated or the offence alleged
referred to in three among them, while the last
one is pending trial. A final decision in this
regard shall be communicated to the petitioner
within a period of one month thereafter.
(b) In the meanwhile, if the petitioner is
not required for any other Crime, but only for
the one for which he is facing trial, then he
shall only be summoned after being issued a
notice under Section 41A of the Cr.P.C.
(c) Needless to say, the provisions of
Section 41 of the Cr.P.C. have not been touched
upon and that the Police will be at liberty to
act thereunder, if it becomes so warranted,
WP(C) NO. 8220 OF 2024
notwithstanding the afore directions with
respect to any other Crime.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
akv
WP(C) NO. 8220 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8220/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P 1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN
TO 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 10/6/2014
EXHIBIT 2 THE TRUE COPY DISCHARGE CARD ISSUED
FROM TALUK HOSPITAL THRIPUNITHURA
DATED 28/11/2013
EXHIBIT P 3 SCREEN SHOT
