Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Paul Julius Ceasar vs State Of Kerala on 17 July, 2025

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

                                               2025:KER:53999

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

 THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 26TH ASHADHA, 1947

                    WP(C) NO. 21003 OF 2025

PETITIONER:

         PAUL JULIUS CEASAR,
         AGED 38 YEARS,
         S/O K S PETER, KOCHUTHURUTHEL HOUSE,
         CHANDIROOR P O, CHERTHALA,
         ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688537

         BY ADVS.
         SRI.K.G.CLEETUS
         SMT.ANN MARIYA ROY


RESPONDENTS:
    1     STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT,
          SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

    2    THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
         AROOR POLICE STATION, CHANDIROOR,
         AROOR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688537

    3    SEBASTIAN C.J.,
         S/O JOSEPH, CHULLITHARA NIKARTHIL,
         EZHUPUNNA P O, CHERTHALA,
         ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688537

         BY ADVS.
         SRI.MANSOOR ALI
         SRI.RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP      FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.07.2025,      THE COURT ON THE SAME       DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                               2025:KER:53999
W.P.(C) No.21003/2025
                                      :2:




                           N. NAGARESH, J.

         `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                     W.P.(C) No.21003 of 2025

          `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                Dated this the 17th day of July, 2025


                            JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~ The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent-Circle Inspector of Police not to harass the petitioner by summoning and calling the petitioner to the police station pursuant to the false complaint of the 3rd respondent.

2. The petitioner states that he is running a business of seafoods. The 3rd respondent is one among the friends of the petitioner and he is doing catering business. The 3rd respondent borrowed ₹5,12,000/- in instalments from 2025:KER:53999 W.P.(C) No.21003/2025 :3: the petitioner. When the petitioner demanded repayment, the 3rd respondent paid ₹99,500/-. He thereafter issued Ext.P2 cheque for an amount of ₹4,23,000/-.

3. The cheque was dishonourned on presentation. The petitioner asked to pay the amount forthwith. On 30.05.2025, the 2nd respondent asked the petitioner to appear in Aroor Police Station. It was alleged that ₹99,500/- paid by the 3rd respondent is under coercion and therefore it has to be repaid. The petitioner informed the police that it is the 3rd respondent who borrowed money from the petitioner.

4. However, the police telephoned the petitioner several times and threatened with dire consequences unless he comes down to the police station. The police force the petitioner to pay ₹1,00,000/- to the 3rd respondent. The petitioner states that the issue between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent is a monetary dispute and the police has no authority to summon the petitioner to the 2025:KER:53999 W.P.(C) No.21003/2025 :4: police station and harass him.

5. The Government Pleader submitted that a complaint was made by the 3rd respondent against the petitioner alleging coercion. Therefore, the petitioner was summoned. As on date, the police have not received any conclusive evidence as regards coercion. The enquiry made by the police cannot be treated as harassment.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 and 2.

7. Going through the pleadings and after hearing the counsel for the petitioner and the Government Pleader, it emerges that prima facie the issue involved is a monetary dispute. If it is a monetary dispute, the police cannot get involved in the issue and the parties have to resort to civil proceedings.

In the circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent not to 2025:KER:53999 W.P.(C) No.21003/2025 :5: harass or summon the petitioner in respect of the monetary dispute, unless there is compelling circumstances to conclude that any criminal offence is committed by the petitioner.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE aks/21.07.2025 2025:KER:53999 W.P.(C) No.21003/2025 :6: APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21003/2025 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOT SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF RS.99,500/- TO THE PETITIONER'S GOOGLE PAY ACCOUNT DATED NIL Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CHEQUE BEARING NO.374587 DATED 29.5.2025 DRAWN ON AROOR BRANCH OF THE FEDERAL BANK LTD ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CHEQUE DISHONOUR MEMO DATED 30.5.2025 ISSUED BY STATE BANK OF INDIA TO THE PETITIONER.