K DEEPTHI Vs. SUPERINTEDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has come to this Court complaining of harassment by the police and praying for issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 1 and 2 to desist from such harassment and vexation at the instance of the 4th respondent.

(2.) THE disputes between the petitioner on the one hand and her parents on the other have been in existence for a long period of time. It is suffice to refer to Ext.P1 judgment to ascertain the details and the nature of the conflict/disputes between the daughter and her parents.

(3.) THE learned Government Pleader after taking instructions submits that the police had to take action in the light of a complaint dated 23.12.2010 submitted by the father of the petitioner, in which it was alleged that his daughter, the petitioner herein, is missing from 19.12.2010. A crime was registered as Crime No.734 of 2010 of Manjeri Police Station. As the allegation related to the missing of a young woman, the police felt persuaded to register the crime and investigate the same. THE petitioner returned to her hostel on 23.12.2010. Her statement was recorded on 25.12.2010 and realising that the complaint did not have substance, investigation is now being closed. THE learned Government Pleader submits that the police did not in any way help the parents of the petitioner to vex or harass her. Since the complaint was by the father about the missing of his daughter, the police took serious note of the complaint and registered the crime. It is only in the course of investigation that the police came to know the background of the case, the disputes between the daughter and her parents, and Ext.P1 judgment passed by this Court. It is submitted that the police do not require the petitioner for any purpose now. She shall not be questioned. Her presence shall not be insisted for such questioning. This petition may, in these circumstances, be closed, submits the learned Government Pleader.