SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 21850

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
ANISH U JALAL – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 11530 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.V.VIJITHA
For the Respondents: SRI. RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE

The court ruled that grievances against police conduct must be directed to the statutory authority as per the Kerala Police Act, 2011, rather than through writ petitions.

Headnote:This judgment addresses a petition for a direction to dispose of a complaint regarding alleged human rights violations by police officers. The court finds that the appropriate remedy lies with the statutory authority under the Kerala Police Act, 2011. The relief sought by the petitioner is declined but liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings is reserved.

Table of Content
1. grievances about police conduct require statutory authority intervention. (Para 1 , 2)
2. writ petition relief is denied but alternative legal procedures are open. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner seeks for a direction to dispose of Ext.P5 complaint filed before the Director General of Police.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the alleged human right violation, on account of alleged brutal assault by the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police as well as another officer, who were attached to the Women’s Cell, Kollam. Though petitioner has filed a complaint before the 2nd respondent, and seeks for a direction to dispose of the said complaint, I am of the view that, if the petitioner is aggrieved by any conduct of the police officers, the remedy is to approach the statutory authority constituted under the Kerala Police Act , 2011.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

4. The direction to dispose of the complaint filed before the 2nd respondent cannot be an appropriate remedy. Hence, the said relief claimed by the petitioner in this writ petition is declined. However, the petitioner is at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings before the statutory authority constituted under law.

Reserving the aforesaid liberty, this writ petition is dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top