This writ petition is filed by the petitioner to issue directions to respondents 1 and 2 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner, who was a victim under the hands of a money lender (respondent No.3), filed Ext.P1 petition before the first respondent in which he had highlighted that in order to cause wrongful loss to the petitioner, respondents 3 and 4 unlawfully obtained title in respect of 2.15 acres of property which was still in the possession of the petitioner. By way of executing Vishwasatheeru (as security for money borrowed), the third respondent obtained sham documents registered in his favour. He is not staying permanently in his residential address but in USA. The entire money lending operations are being conducted by the third respondent through the 4th respondent. According to the petitioner, enquiry as per Ext.P2 shows that there is commission of cognizable offence. But the Circle Inspector of Police has not taken any action and still respondents 3 and 4 are continuing their activities. The act of respondents 3 and 4 will fall under the provisions of Kerala Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 and respondents 3 and 4 will come under the definition of 'loan shark' and 'property grabber' under Sections 2(q) and 2(s) of the said Act. Since respondents 1 and 2 are not taking proper action, the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this Court seeking the following reliefs:
i. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ orders or direction to call for the entire records relating to Ext.P2 and direct the 1st respondent to conduct proper investigation by Crime Branch or any specially deputed higher officers.
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ orders, directing the 2nd respondent to register crime on the cognizable offence which revealed as per Ext.P2.
iii. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ orders or directions to the 1st and 2nd respondent to take appropriate actions to prevent the continuation unauthorised and illegal money ending business of the 3rd and 4th respondents.
iv. Grant such other reliefs which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper to be granted in the interest of justice.
v. To grant the costs of this writ petition.
3. On the basis of the allegations in the petition, a statement has been called for from the second respondent and the second respondent filed a statement in which it is stated that Ext.P1 has been considered by first respondent through Circle Inspector of Police, Kaduthuruthi, who filed a report in which it was mentioned that allegations mentioned in the petition are civil nature and civil suit has already been filed and no further action is required and copy of the report has been given to the petitioner as well which is produced as Ext.P2 and stated that there is no necessity to take any further action in Ext.P1.
4. When the writ petition came up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is already a civil suit filed in respect of the document mentioned in the petition as O.S.No.390/2011 and that is pending before Sub Court, Kottayam and also submitted that in view of the statement filed by the second respondent, this writ petition can be closed on that basis leaving open the right of the petitioner to exercise his remedies under law before appropriate forum in accordance with law. The above submission of the counsel for the petitioner is recorded and the petition is disposed of recording the statement filed by the second respondent leaving open the right of the petitioner to seek the remedies available to him for redressal of his grievance before appropriate forum in accordance with law.
Sd/-
K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.
cl /true copy/ P.S to Judge