Aliyamma @ Mercy vs P.V. Joy and Others

R. Basant, J.—The petitioner has come to this Court complaining of harassment by the police. She seeks issue of direction under Article 226 of the Constitution to put an end to such harassment. According to the petitioner - a widow aged about 71 years, she is the owner of an item of property. There have been disputes in respect of that property. According to the petitioner, she has won in two tires of litigation. The matter is pending in appeal before this Court as a Regular Second Appeal. Though initially there was an order directing the parties to maintain status quo, the period of the said order has expired and the order has not been further extended. At this juncture, certain trees were cut in the property and there was an attempt to remove such trees. The first respondent complained to the local police and the police is harassing the petitioner. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court with this writ petition.

The first respondent has entered appearance. The learned Counsel submits that the dispute is in the seizin of the Civil Court. It is true that the period specified in the order directing maintenance of status-quo has expired. The petitioner and her son, evidently taking advantage of that, had taken law into their hands and had cut the trees. It is hence that the 1st respondent was obliged to complain before the police. The first respondent has a further case that the trees were not standing in the property covered by the civil dispute and they stand in the property of the petitioner. The first respondent had only complained to the police that he is not in any way responsible for the alleged harassment by the police. According to the first respondent, there has been no harassment and the petitioner is attempting to stead a march over the first respondent by securing an order of police protection.

We turned to the learned Government Pleader for submissions. The learned Government Pleader submits that on the complaint of the first respondent a crime has been registered against the son of the petitioner. The petitioner is not an accused. No action has been taken or is contemplated to be taken against the petitioner in that crime. The petitioner need not apprehend any harassment on the part of the police against her. Of course, as regards the son of the petitioner, it is submitted that the crime has been registered and the same is pending investigation. As regards the tree cut in the property, the learned Government Pleader submits that the police have taken the logs into custody under a seizure mahazar and the same has been entrusted to the petitioner herself. The petitioner need not apprehend any acts of harassment on the part of the police. The petitioner can seek appropriate further directions from the Civil Court or from the Court before which the crime is reported and the seizure of articles are reported. The learned Government Pleader, on behalf of respondents 1 to 4, undertakes that there shall be no action whatsoever against the petitioner on the basis of the crime registered. Her presence is not required in the police station and she shall not be summoned, submits by the learned Government Pleader.

We have adverted to all the relevant circumstances. We are satisfied that no directions under Article 226 of the Constitution can, need or deserve to be issued.

Accepting the submissions of the learned Government Pleader, this writ petition is dismissed.