Allowed

Sarath Menon, v. the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC5 Apr 2022WP(C)/5758/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Filed as often as happened. The court held that the petitioner must be summoned following due notice under Cr.P.C. Sections 160 or 41A, police must not interfere in matrimonial disputes, but the investigation into the FIR must proceed without further delay.

What did the court decide?

Directed police to summon petitioner under Cr.P.C. Sections 160 or 41A, refrain from interfering in matrimonial disputes, and conclude the investigation without delay.

Sarath Menon, Vs the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 5758 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SARATH MENON, AGED 32 YEARS S/O.JAYAPRAKASH, ANCHATH HOUSE, KOLATHUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 305.

¶8

BY ADVS. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL R.RAJITHA CHITHRA S.BABU R.N.SANDEEP

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMBASSERY AIRPORT POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 585.

¶11

2 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMBASSERY AIRPORT POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 585.

¶12

3 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, ERNAKULAM RURAL, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 101.

¶13

4 ATHIRA VIJAYAKUMAR, D/O.VIJAYAKUMAR, VAKKAYIL HOUSE (SANTHOSH BAHVAN), EAST DESOM, DESOM P.O., U.C.COLLEGE, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 012.

¶14

BY ADVS. V.J.JOSEPH SAJAN PUTHENVEETTIL SRI.T.K.SHAJAHAN SR.PP

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO. 5758 OF 2022

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:-

¶20

I.Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the 1^st and 2^nd respondents not to harass the petitioner in connection with investigation based on Exhibit P1 FIR.; II. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1^st and 2^nd respondent to conclude the investigation on the basis of Exhibit P1 FIR within a time limit as may be prescribed by this Hon'ble Court.;

¶21

III. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the 2^nd respondent to withdraw the instruction given to the Manager, Federal Bank, Kodakara Branch to freeze the operation in Locker No.SSXA030, which Is referred to in Exhibit P7 notice;

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶23

learned Government Pleader as well as the learned counsel appearing for the 4^th respondent.

¶24

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been unnecessarily harassed with regard to an investigation in connection with Ext.P1 FIR. It

¶25

is submitted that an anticipatory bail has also been granted to the petitioner. A detailed counter affidavit has been placed on

¶26

WP(C) NO. 5758 OF 2022

¶27

¶28

record by the party respondents stating that there are matrimonial disputes pending between the parties.

¶29

The learned Government Pleader would also submit that the petitioner had been summoned only with regard to the complaint submitted by the party respondent and that the offence alleged was under Section 498 A of the IPC.

¶30

Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be summoned only in accordance with law after issuing due notices either under Section 160 or under Section 41 A of the Cr.P.C. The police shall not interfere in the matrimonial disputes between the parties which shall be disposed of in accordance with law by the appropriate courts. However, further steps for concluding the investigation on Ext.P1 shall also be taken in accordance with law without further delay.

¶31

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶34

ska

¶35

WP(C) NO. 5758 OF 2022

¶36

¶37

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5758/2022

¶38

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶39

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.688/21 OF NEDUMBASSERY AIRPORT POLICE STATION.
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE VANITHA CELL OBTAINING AS PER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE NEDUMBASSERY AIRPORT POLICE STATION.
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 27.08.2021 IN CRL.MC NO.1743/21 BEFORE THE SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM.
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY OF SEARCH WARRANT ISSUED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT 1, ANGAMALY.
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF SEARCH LIST PREPARED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P7	TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 19.01.22 ISSUED BY THE MANAGER, KODAKARA BRANCH.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT
Exhibit P4A	COPY OF OP NO.2869/2021 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT AT ERNAKULAM
Exhibit P4B	COPY OF OP NO.2871/2021 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT AT ERNAKULAM

Sarath Menon, v. the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarath Menon, v. the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajeeve Purushothaman, Vs the Maradu Municipality

Mohammed Abdul Khader , Vs Cherpulassery Municipality

C. Rajesh Vs State of Kerala Represented by Its Secretary Localself Government

Hameed Vs the District Collector

N.M.Saidu Hussain Vs the Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram Corporation

Babu Vs State of Kerala