High Court Kerala High Court

Satheesh S vs Superintendent on 15 September, 2010

Kerala High Court
Satheesh S vs Superintendent on 15 September, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 28496 of 2010(J)


1. SATHEESH S,S/O.SAHADEVAN, AGED 36 YEARS
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL BUREAU OF
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRY,SC, C.B.I.

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI

 Dated :15/09/2010

 O R D E R
             THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN &
                       P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
                    -------------------------------------------
                      W.P(C).No.28496 OF 2010
                    -------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 15th day of September, 2010


                                JUDGMENT

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J.

The petitioner states that he runs an institution preparing

students for entrance examination for recruitment in the Indian

Railways and Indian Army. He says that one Praveen and Rajesh

were arrested by the C.B.I. on allegation of having received

amounts offering appointments in the Indian Army and that

C.B.I. officials of Ernakulam unit are visiting the residence of the

petitioner in search of him. The petitioner further states that his

father is suffering from acute cancer and is admitted in the

Amrutha hospital and the C.B.I. officials are regularly coming to

the hospital also in search of him. We find that the immediate

requirement is for the petitioner to appear before the first

respondent Superintendent of C.B.I. If there is any case against

him, the C.B.I. officials are well within authority to question him.

Learned counsel for the C.B.I. states that the petitioner is the

WPC.28496/10

2

third accused. With this, we are not inclined to treat this writ

petition on allegation of police harassment as an application for

bail or anticipatory bail. Therefore, we dismiss this writ petition

without prejudice to the petitioner’s right to seek relief from the

competent court, in accordance with law.

Sd/-

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN,
Judge.

Sd/-

P.Q.BARKATH ALI,
Judge.

kkb.16/09.