SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 74867

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J
Helena T. Raged – Appellant
Versus
Station House Officer Thrissur West Police Station – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 38623 OF 2026



Important Points

The court held that a petitioner not arrayed as an accused in a criminal case is entitled to apply for a non-involvement certificate through prescribed portals, and the police must consider such applications regardless of FIRs against employees.

Subject

Administrative Law - Writ Jurisdiction

Act Referred

Abkari Act: S.56(b), S.67A

Headnote

(A) Police Clearance Certificate - Refusal based on pending FIR against employee - If the petitioner is not an accused in the criminal case, the pendency of an FIR against a manager should not necessarily preclude the issuance of a clearance certificate for the proprietor. (Para 2)

(B) Administrative Procedure - Issuance of Non-Involvement Certificate - Petitioner may apply for an involvement/non-involvement certificate through the designated official portal (Thuna Portal) for consideration by the police authorities. (Para 4)

Issues: Whether the respondent was justified in refusing a police clearance certificate to the petitioner based on an FIR registered against the manager of the petitioner's hotel.

Legal Category Hierarchy

  • administrative law
    • licensing and regulation (Para 2)
    • procedural fairness (Para 4)
  • practice and procedure
    • writ jurisdiction (Para 1, 4)

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M.G. Karthikeyan, C C Thomas
For the Respondents: Unni Sebastian Kappen

Table of Contents

1. Petitioner sought a police clearance certificate for business renewal, but the request was denied due to a pending criminal case against the business manager. (Para 2 )

2. Petitioner contended entitlement to the certificate as she is not an accused; the state proposed a fresh application for an involvement or non-involvement certificate via portal. (Para 2 , 4 )

3. The court noted that official records provided through a standard digital portal would resolve the dispute over the status of the petitioner versus the pending criminal case. (Para 4 )

4. Where an alternative administrative remedy is identified to address status verification, the initial contested order may be set aside to allow for a direct application. (Para 4 )

5. The impugned order was set aside with directions to the petitioner to apply via the official portal and to the authority to process it within one week. (Para 4 )

6. Can a business owner be denied a police clearance certificate due to a criminal case against their manager?

The court did not determine the validity of the denial on merits, but instead adopted a consensual resolution by directing the petitioner to apply for an involvement or non-involvement certificate via the official government portal. (Para 4 )

JUDGMENT

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

Dated this the 13th day of November, 2026

The above writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“i) Call for the records leading to Ext.P2 and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction;

ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent to issue police clearance certificate to the petitioner without reckoning the pendency of Ext.P3 FIR against the manger of the petitioner;

iii) grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;

and iv) dispense with the filing of the translation of vernacular documents.”

[SIC]

2. The petitioner applied for police clearance certificate for producing before the classification committee for the renewal of the classification of the four star in respect of the hotel of the petitioner. The respondent issued Ext.P2 certificate and no police clearance certificate is issued. Instead, it is submitted that, the respondent issued Ext.P2 stating that Ext.P3 FIR is registered against the Manager of the petitioner for offence under Section 56(b) of the Abkari Act. According to the petitioner, she is not an accused in any case. It is also submitted that, even if the allegations are correct, the offence alleged is under Section 56(b) of the Abkari Act and the same is compoundable under Section 67A of the Abkari Act. It is submitted that the respondent is duty bound to issue police clearance certificate to the petitioner since admittedly she is not arrayed as an accused so far. Hence, this writ petition is filed.

3. Heard, Adv. Sri. C C Thomas, the learned Senior Counsel instructed by Adv. Sri. M G Karthikeyan, appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

4. The counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions raised in this writ petition. The Government Pleader, after getting instructions submitted that the petitioner can apply through “Thuna Portal” for involvement / non-involvement certificate and, if such an application is filed, necessary certificate will be issued. If that be the case, Ext.P2 can be set aside and the petitioner can be allowed to file a fresh application and there can be a direction to pass appropriate orders, within a time frame.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1. Exhibit P2 is set aside.

2. The petitioner is free to submit an application through “Thuna Portal” for involvement / non-involvement certificate, within two days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and a copy of the application should be submitted to the respondent.

3. If such an application is received, the respondent will consider the same and do the needful to issue the certificate, within one week from the date of receipt of the application.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top