High Court Kerala High Court

Kareemghan vs State Of Kerala on 24 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
Kareemghan vs State Of Kerala on 24 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 17045 of 2009(A)


1. KAREEMGHAN, AGED 44 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. FAREEDA, AGED 39 YEARS, W/O.KAREEMGHAN,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY,
                       ...       Respondent

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.J.SANTHOSH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN

 Dated :24/06/2009

 O R D E R
                P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ.

                     -------------------------------

                      W.P.(C) No.17045 of 2009

                     -------------------------------

                    Dated this the 24th June, 2009

                           J U D G M E N T

Raman, J.

This writ petition is filed for a direction commanding

the second respondent not to harass the petitioners or to

summon them to the police station, except in accordance with

law. It is submitted that apprehending arrest, petitioners have

filed Bail Application, B.A.No.2909/2009, and the matter is under

consideration by this Court. Ext.P1 order also states that there

was an undertaking by the Public Prosecutor not to arrest the

petitioners, till such time instruction is received. As such, the

petitioners can bring to the notice of the Court about any alleged

illegality, in case an attempt is made to arrest them.

                2.     The     learned    Government       Pleader,  on

instructions, submits that crime is           registered subsequently.

W.P.(C) No.17045 of 2009


                                 2

However, it is not necessary for us to go into the merits of the

matter, since the matter is pending before another Court.

3. As regards the allegation that some articles

belonging to the petitioner have been seized by the second

respondent, the learned Government Pleader submits that the

same has been produced before the Magistrate Court. If so,

nothing prevents the petitioner in approaching that Court for

appropriate remedies. As such, we are of the view that no

further orders are required in this matter. Leaving open the right

of the petitioners as aforesaid, the writ petition is closed.

P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE

P.BHAVADASAN , JUDGE.

nj.