The petitioner herein and the respondents 3 to 7 are the partners of a firm conducting a business at East Nada, Guruvayoor by name 'Bonny Sweets'. Civil as well as criminal proceedings are pending between the parties. There is already an order of interim injunction against the petitioner herein from the civil court, restraining him from alienating the shop in question until further orders. The said order of injunction was passed by the civil court on 10.10.2014. Much later, the Sub Inspector of Police, Guruvayoor gave a notice to him under Section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, directing him to close down the business on the ground that the difference of opinion and disputes between the parties will lead to commission of offences. The said notice is under challenge in this proceeding. It is submitted that the petitioner has also filed a civil suit against the other side. Anyway, the notice given by the police under Section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not carry any date. This notice also does not show what cognizable offence is apprehended by the police. On a prima facie finding that the police has exceeded the limits of Section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, notice on admission was given to respondents 3 to 7. They entered appearance through counsel and raised objection regarding prayer (b) made by the petitioner in this proceeding. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that for such relief the parties will have to approach the competent civil court. Of course, the learned counsel did not make much argument regarding the sanctity and validity of Annexure E notice given by the police under Section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On a reading of the said notice, I find that much argument is not required to find that it is not legal. No doubt, the Sub Inspector has exceeded his limits and powers under Section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This notice does not show what cognizable offence is apprehended by him, or why he entertained such an apprehension when the dispute is pending before the competent civil court having jurisdiction to resolve the dispute. Strangely enough the notice does not carry any date also. I find that the said notice is liable to be quashed. However, the other dispute as regards prayer (b) will have to be resolved by the competent civil court.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is actually in possession of the business, and the others once trespassed into the premises under the influence of police. Anyway, that is a matter to be decided by the civil court. If he has lost possession inspite of interim injunction, he can very well approach the civil court, and the civil court can restore possession in exercise of the powers of restitution under the Code of Civil Procedure. Once having granted an order in his favour it will have to be enforced, and if he has lost possession by any illegal means or by any means other than court orders, the civil court will have to restore it in exercise of the power of restitution. Anyway, let those matters be decided by the competent civil court.
In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of as follows:
a) Annexure E notice given by the Sub Inspector of Police, East Nada Police Station, Guruvayoor under Section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will stand quashed.
b) The police will have to honour the civil court's order, and also the licence granted from the Guruvayoor Municipality.
c) As regards prayers (b) and (c) the parties will have to approach the civil court, and the civil court will have to pass appropriate orders.
P.UBAID JUDGE ab