R. Sudharmma vs The Commissioner Of Police
2024 Latest Caselaw 5282 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 5282 Ker
Judgement Date : 15 February, 2024

Kerala High Court

R. Sudharmma vs The Commissioner Of Police on 15 February, 2024

Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan

Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

       THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

  THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY    2024 / 26TH MAGHA, 1945

                      WP(C) NO. 27214 OF 2023

PETITIONER:

          R. SUDHARMMA, AGED 70 YEARS,
          W/O K. RAVINDRAN,
          "SOUPARNIKA", T.C. 1/91,
          FAVOURITE HOMES PVT. LTD.,
          PADIKKAVILAKOM ROAD,
          KAZHAKUTTAM (P.O.),
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
          PIN - 695582

          BY ADV K.RAJESH KANNAN

RESPONDENTS:

   1      THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE
          COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
          C.V. RAMAN PILLAI ROAD, THYCAUD,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014

   2      STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOWDIAR POLICE STATION,
          KOWDIAR P.O.,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003

   3      STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KAZHAKKOOTTAM POLICE STATION,
          KAZHAKKOOTTAM P.O.,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695582

   4      SURESH BABUSAI KRIPA, NRA 23A,
          NANTHAN NAGAR, NANTHANCODE,   KOWDIAR.P.O.,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003

   5      SINDHU BABUSAI KRIPA, NRA 23A,
          NANTHAN NAGAR, NANTHANCODE,   KOWDIAR.P.O.,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003
 W.P.(C).27214 of 2023           2




    6        KARNA BABUSAI KRIPA, NRA 23A,
             NANTHAN NAGAR, NANTHANCODE,   KOWDIAR.P.O.,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003

             BY ADVS.RIJI RAJENDRAN
             MITHA SUDHINDRAN(K/000859/2015)
             SOURADH C. VALSON(K/3270/2022)
             BHAIRAVI S.N(K/1827/2020)

             SRI P M SHAMEER, GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).27214 of 2023                 3




                                    JUDGMENT

The Petitioner, a septuagenarian female, is before this Court complaining

of undue harassment at the hands of the Station House Officer, Kowdiar Police

station, which she alleges is at the behest of respondents 4 to 6.

2. The submissions disclose that the 4th respondent is the brother,

the 5th respondent is the sister-in-law, and the 6th respondent is the nephew

of the petitioner. The dispute revolves around a two-story building, the

ownership of which lies with respondents 4 and 5, with the petitioner having

purchased the upper floor. The petitioner has leased the upper floor to a

tenant who in turn has installed a CCTV camera, which, according to the party

respondents infringes their privacy. This led the party respondents to approach

the police and lodge a complaint.

3. Sri. Rajesh Kannan, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner contends that the crux of the issue is a dispute between the tenant

and the party respondents. Should there be concerns over privacy violations, it

is incumbent upon the aggrieved to seek redress through the Civil Courts. He

contends that there is no justification in summoning the petitioner, a vulnerable

elderly woman, to the police station in connection with such matters.

4. The learned Government Pleader points out that on receipt of the

complaint, the petitioner was merely called over phone, and no further action

was taken.

5. From the submissions, it is apparent that the dispute between the

parties stems from certain action taken by the tenant. There is no justification

in summoning the petitioner to redress such grievances. If the police receives

any complaint, which indicates the commission of a crime, they would be

justified in initiating action and not otherwise. I record the undertaking of the

learned government pleader that the presence of the petitioner is not required.

In that view of the matter, I direct the second respondent to refrain from

summoning the petitioner in connection with essentially civil disputes.

This writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE DCS

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27214/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1644/2009 DATED 25.6.2009 EXECUTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST LAND TAX RECEIPT NO.KL01011004579/2023 DATED 31.5.2023 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER ISSUED FROM THE LAND REVENUE DEPARTMENT

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER NO.BAH/LAB/415/643/2018 DATED 16.10.2018 OF SECOND SECRETARY (CONS), EMBASSY OF INDIA, BAHRAIN, FORWARDING COMPLAINT OF MRS. LAKSHMI RAVINDRAN TO THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF SECRETARY

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 7.11.2018 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 5.11.2022 FILED BY MRS. FASILA BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 5.11.2022 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO FASILA.M.R.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 8.11.2022 ISSUED BY THE KERALA WOMENS COMMISSION TO MRS. FAZILA

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

Exhibit R4B A true copy of the Reply Notice dated 14.11.2018

Exhibit R4C A true copy of the complaint filed by the 5th Respondent dated 27.10.2022

Exhibit R4D A true copy of the Notice dated 14.07.2021

Exhibit R4A A true copy of the written complaint submitted by the 5th Respondent before the Museum Police Station on 11.10.2018 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit -R4A.