AJITH KUMAR K.M. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner alleges that he is being harassed by the 6 th respondent Circle Inspector of Police, Changanacherry. According to him, the said officer has been summoning him to the Police Station unnecessarily and forcing him to settle an alleged transaction that had been involved between him and a person by name Sri. Jins Augustine.

(2.) As per the petitioner, there was no such transaction between him and the aforementioned 'Jins Augustine' and he says that he has been told the father of the aforementioned Sri.Jins Augustine has approached the Police with a complaint that the petitioner owes his son large amounts of money in relation to certain business transactions they had in Abudabi. The petitioner says that, even assuming that this complaint is true or that the allegations against him are credible, it would still not amount to any offence in India because even going by the complaint, all these alleged transactions were done outside India. He, therefore, prays that the 6th respondent be restrained from unnecessarily summoning him into the Police Station and forcing him to settle the afore alleged transaction with the father of the above named Sri.Jins Augustine.

(3.) The learned Government Pleader, who submits on behalf of the Police Authorities on instructions, says that a complaint has been received not only from the father of Sri.Jins Augustine but from Sri.Jins Augustine himself, who had earlier filed a complaint before the District Police Chief. According to the learned Government Pleader, both these complaints were looked into by the Police in terms of law and it was found that, even if the allegations in the complaint are true, the cause of action may not have arisen in India. He, however, adds that if the complaints reveal after enquiry that cognizable offences have been committed in India, then certainly the Police will look into it and to take appropriate action. The learned Government Pleader further submits that, contrary to the allegations of the petitioner, there is no harassment meted out by the 6 th respondent to him but that he was only summoned so as to cause enquiry into the complaints made by Sri. Jins Augustine and his father.