K KUNJUPILLAI Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has come to this Court complaining about harassment by respondents 1 and 2. Respondents 1 and 2 are officials of the C.B.I. THEy are from the Chandigarh Unit of the C.B.I. THEy have come to Kerala in search of an accused in a crime registered at their Unit. THEy have issued Ext.P1 notice to one Mr. Mohankumar, the son-in-law of the petitioner. THE said son-in-law has been directed to appear before the C.B.I. officials in connection with the investigation of a crime registered. THE said Mohankumar is not available. THE officials are compelling and harassing the petitioner in their attempt to somehow secure the presence of the said Mohankumar. THE petitioner apprehends that he may be arrested. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court with this petition claiming issue of directions under Art.226 of the Constitution against harassment by the police officials i.e., respondents 1 and 2.

(2.) NOTICE has been given to the learned Standing Counsel for the C.B.I. The learned Standing Counsel, after taking instructions, submits that, at the moment, the petitioner has not been arrayed as an accused. Hence there is at present no proposal to arrest the petitioner. The C.B.I. is interested only in securing the presence of the son-in-law of the petitioner who is already arrayed as an accused in a pending crime. Ext.P1 notice has been issued to the son-in-law of the petitioner to appear before the officials to facilitate a proper and expeditious investigation. He is making himself scarce and is not appearing before the C.B.I. officials. C.B.I. officials are attempting to trace him and to question him in connection with the crime.

(3.) THIS writ petition is accordingly dismissed with the above observations.