High Court Kerala High Court

T.M.Moideenkutty vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 13 July, 2009

Kerala High Court
T.M.Moideenkutty vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 13 July, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18611 of 2009(V)


1. T.M.MOIDEENKUTTY, THODIMANNIL HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SADIQUALI V.P., S/O.ALI,

                        Vs



1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

3. JANARDHANAN, "SREESYLAM", MANJERI,(JUNIO

4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.SAMSUDIN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :13/07/2009

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

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

                     W.P.(C) No.18611 of 2009

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

                    Dated this the 13th July,2009

                           J U D G M E N T

Raman, J.

Alleging police harassment and seeking appropriate

direction, this writ petition is filed. According to the petitioners,

there are some money transactions with the third respondent

who is employed as Junior Superintendent in the office of the

Munsiff Court, Manjeri. It is stated that third respondent is

known to them and he has also long acquaintance with them.

It is stated that there is a promissory note executed by the third

respondent in favour of the first petitioner, but the money was

not paid. Therefore, to enquire about this, first petitioner went

to the house of the third respondent and demanded return of the

amount. But the third respondent misbehaved. It is also alleged

that he has misused his position and borrowed huge amounts

from various sources. When steps were taken by the petitioners

for realisation of the said amount, second respondent came to

W.P.(C) No.18611 of 2009

2

the house of the first petitioner and asked him to come to the

police station for settlement of the dispute. On going there, it

was told that third respondent is in accute financial constrain and

asked the first petitioner to accept an amount of Rs.10,000/=

from the third respondent and to hand over the promissory note

to the third respondent. When first petitioner refused, he has

been repeatedly asked to come to the police station. According

to the petitioners, being a money transaction and dispute of a

civil nature, the police is unnecessarily harassing them.

2. The learned Government Pleader appearing on

behalf of the official respondents submits that a complaint has

been preferred by the third respondent to the Superintendent of

Police, Malappuram, the same has been forwarded to the Station

House Officer, and on receipt of the same, Crime No.403/2009

has been registered under Section 447 and other relevant

sections of Indian Penal Court, by the Manjeri Police Station. It

is further stated that only in connection with the investigation of

W.P.(C) No.18611 of 2009

3

the said crime that the police has asked the first petitioner to

come to the police station.

In the above circumstances, there are no materials

on the basis of which it could be said that there is any

harassment meted out to the petitioners. Petitioners can resort

to other legal remedies available under law. Accordingly, this

writ petition is closed.

P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE

P.BHAVADASAN , JUDGE.

nj.