"Whether the detention of a citizen in the Police Station for not having opened the door of his hotel room, when directed to do so at 2.30 a.m. in the morning by the Sub Inspector of Police can be justified as the due exercise of Police Powers?"

This is the question that arises for consideration in this appeal.

2. The second defendant in a suit for damages is the appellant. The first respondent is the plaintiff and the second respondent is the State represented by the District Collector, the first defendant in the suit. The suit was filed for recovery of damages by the first respondent/plaintiff for his illegal detention by the Police authorities consequent to his refusal to open the door of his hotel room at the dead of the night, on being asked to do so by the local Sub Inspector of Police. The appellant is the Sub Inspector of Police involved in the incident. Though an amount of Rs.50,000/- was claimed as damages, the court below has decreed only an amount of Rs.500/-, which is the subject matter of challenge in the above appeal.

3. The suit was filed by the first respondent on the following averments:

The first respondent/plaintiff who is a native of Uzhavoor in Meenachil Taluk is presently settled and residing at Gudallur in Tamil Nadu State. He is a Post Graduate in Arts and Education and was a teacher in various schools like Santhome High School, Madras, FACT Township School, Udyogamandal, Illesha-Ibadan Grammar Schools, Nigeria and Good Shepherd Public School, Ooty. He is the author and publisher of various books and publications. Presently, he is a planter and resides at the Good Shepherd Estate, Gudallur. His wife is a retired High School Assistant and his son is a Post Graduate who is managing his own business. His second son is doing his engineering degree course and his eldest daughter is studying for BDS, while the youngest is doing her M.Sc Degree Course.

4. On 25.04.1995, at about 9.30 p.m., he reached Koothattukulam Town on the way to his home town, Uzhavoor. As it was late, he could not get a bus to Uzhavoor. Therefore, he took a room in Cisler Tourist Home and stayed there for the night. At about 2.30 a.m., somebody knocked on his door and asked him to open the room. On enquiry, he was told that it was the Sub Inspector of Police, Koothattukulam, who was waiting outside for the purpose of checking the room. But, the plaintiff suspected the identity of the persons outside and since he was afraid of thieves and robbers, he did not open the door. He asked them to disclose the identity of the persons who were standing outside. However, they started pulling and pushing at the door trying to open the same by force. After some time, since he did not open the door, they left the premises. On the next day morning at about 6 O'clock when he got up, he tried to open the door and found that the room was locked from outside. There was no means of communication with the reception counter. Therefore, he called out to some people who were walking on the road outside and requested them to pass information of his plight to the receptionist. Within ten minutes, a Police jeep came with seven Policemen and they took him to the Koothattukulam Police Station where he was abused and ill treated like a criminal.

5. At about 10 O'clock in the morning, the Sub Inspector of Police who is the appellant/second defendant came to the Police Station, called the plaintiff to his room and started questioning him using foul language and threatening him with dire consequences. The plaintiff was roughed up and pushed around causing him bodily pain. He asked the plaintiff to explain why he had refused to open the door, the previous night. Though the plaintiff told him that he was afraid of thieves and was not convinced about the identity of the persons who were outside, the second defendant was not willing to accept his explanation. After the ill-treatment, the Policemen made him open his suit case and they checked his belongings. Without all