IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 27184 of 2008(J)
1. LAJEESH.K.B, S/O. BALAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. INSPECTOR OF RAILWAY POLICE,
... Respondent
2. SUPERINENDENT OF POLICE
3. I.C.I.C.I BANK LTD,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.V.AMARESAN
For Respondent :SRI.KKM.SHERIF
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :05/02/2010
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
-------------------------------------------
W.P(C).No.27184 OF 2008
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of February, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner seeks relief against the freezing of Ext.P1
S.B. Account maintained by him with the third respondent bank.
He attributes such freezing to proceedings issued by
respondents 1 and/or 2. The first respondent has placed a
detailed counter affidavit on record. The said uncontroverted
counter affidavit dated 19.1.2009 states that the petitioner is
involved in various offences registered alleging theft. The Police
would allege that the petitioner is highly expertised in picking up
the personal belongings of railway passengers, especially
travelling in A/c coaches during night in between Palakkad and
Kasaragod. He attempts to show that he has studied up to
M.Com. and is a faculty in a private educational institution and
that he occasionally travels in A/c coaches. The detailed modus
operandi attributed to the petitioner is placed on record through
counter affidavit. With the aforesaid stand, the police officials
WPC.27184/08
2
state that the sale proceeds of the stolen articles are deposited in
the S.B. account and therefore, that account has been frozen.
In the aforesaid circumstance, I do not find any legal
infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned action. Ends of
justice do not require the impugned action to be interfered with
in exercise of discretionary visitorial jurisdiction under Article
226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition fails. The
same is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN,
Judge.
kkb.08/02.