In this writ appeal against a Single Judge order dismissing a petition for compensation for alleged illegal arrest and detention, the High Court of Kerala held that the case does not warrant a public law remedy for Article 21 violation.
Writ appeal dismissed; writ petition not entertained for compensation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937
WA.No. 2402 of 2015 ()
----------------------------------(AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO. 22767/2015 DATED 06-08-2015)
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
V.K.HAMSA, S/O. HASSANKUTTY,AGED 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT VARIKAMKUZHIYIL HOUSE, NEAR PANOLIKAVU, CHUNDAPURAM P.O., KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE - 673 572.
BY ADVS.DR.V.N.SANKARJEE SRI.S.SIDHARDHAN SRI.V.N.MADHUSUDANAN SMT.R.UDAYA JYOTHI
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KODUVALLY POLICE STATION, KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE - 673 572.
3. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, 6TH FLOOR, LOK NAYAK BHAVAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI - 110 003.
4. THE DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, 6TH FLOOR,
LOK NAYAK BHAVAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI - 110 003.
5. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, KANOOS CASTLE, MULLASSERY CANAL RAOD (WEST),
KOCHI - 682 011.
2/-
sts
-2-
W.A.NO.2402/2015
6. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT, 3RD FLOOR, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, M.S. BABURAJ ROAD, KALLAI, KOZHIKODE - 673 003.
7. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT, SUB ZONAL OFFICE, 5/2145, WAFA BHAVAN, MAVOOR ROAD, KOZHIKODE - 673 004.
R1 & R2 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR R3 TO R7 BY SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
ADV. SMT.C.G.PREETHA, CGC
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J. &
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
================
W.A. No. 2402 of 2015
===============
Dated this, the 26th day of November, 2015
J U D G M E N T
Ashok Bhushan, C.J.
Heard. This writ appeal has been filed against judgment dated 6th of August, 2015 in WP(C) No.22767/2015 by which judgment the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed.
prayers;
“(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1, 2, 3 and 6 to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) to the petitioner for having the petitioner been arrested and detained illegally.
(b) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing quashing Ext.P3 order after calling for the records leading thereto.”
amount of `9,50,000/- in Indian Currency from the petitioner.
W.A.No2402/15
-:2:-
Petitioner was produced before the 6th respondent on next day and was released. A mahazar was prepared for seizure of the money. Writ petition was filed by the petitioner in the year 2014 being WP(C) No.35208/2014 challenging the proceedings under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'FEMA'), which writ petition was disposed of by this Court on 3/2/2015. In the said writ petition, neither any relief nor any prayer was made for any compensation alleging illegal arrest.
W.A.No2402/15
-:3:-
5014] .
W.A.No2402/15
-:4:-
that there was non application of mind and the documents sought for would amount to a roving enquiry by the Directorate. The writ petition was not entertained by the Madras High Court and the writ petition was dismissed. The observations relied regarding the object and purpose of the FEMA in the judgment needs no consideration for the purpose of the present case since against Ext.P3 order, petitioner has a statutory remedy of appeal and it is always open for the petitioner to take all such contentions in law and facts which are permissible for challenging Ext.P3 order.
Writ appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN, CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE
Rp26/11/2015
//True Copy//
PS to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ court should entertain a challenge for compensation alleging illegal arrest and detention under Article 21 in the facts of this case.
Whether the learned Single Judge committed any error in not entertaining the writ petition for violation of Article 21.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
K.A.Manshoor v. Assistant DirectorReferred¶4
K.A.Manshoor v. Assistant Director, Enforcement, Directorate, Chennai [(2009) 0 Supreme (Mad) 5014]
V.K. Hamsa
The State of Kerala
The Union of India
The Assistant Director of Enforcement
Ashok Bhushan
A.M. Shaffique
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
