K.K.Karthiyayanikutty vs State Of Kerala on 19 February, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 34306 of 2006(H)


1. K.K.KARTHIYAYANIKUTTY,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. S.I. OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.CHERIAN

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :19/02/2007

 O R D E R
                                   R.BASANT, J

                         ------------------------------------

                          W.P(C).No.34306 of 2006

                        -------------------------------------

                 Dated this the 19th  day of February, 2007


                                   JUDGMENT

There is no representation for the petitioner today also. The

same was the situation on the last two days’ posting also. As directed

by the Court, the Investigating Officer, ie. the 3rd respondent has filed

a statement.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that her husband was

killed in a road traffic accident at 9.15 p.m on 03.03.2006. It was a

case of hit and run. The injured was taken to the hospital. He was

declared dead. A crime was registered. But the investigation of the

crime has not led to any tangible results. The vehicle involved in the

accident has not been ascertained yet. No clues could be gathered

about the vehicle which was involved in the accident. In these

circumstances, a report has been submitted to the Court to inform the

Court that the case remains undetected. The Investigating Officer

submits that earnest efforts are being taken to trace out the vehicle

involved in the accident. If any relevant information is obtained, the

case shall be reopened and further investigations shall be conducted.

3. The petitioner had made allegations raising the suspicion

that one Tavera vehicle bearing registration No.KL17 B 9361 is the

vehicle involved in the crime. The Investigating Officer reports that

W.P(C).No.34306 of 2006 2

after doing the necessary verification and cross checking, the

investigator is satisfied that, that is not the vehicle involved in the

accident.

4. In the circumstances referred above, I do not find any

justification in the contention raised that a proper investigation has

not been conducted. I am satisfied that no further directions need be

issued. The 2nd respondent shall continue the efforts to resolve the

mystery of the crime and identify the vehicle involved in the accident.

5. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed

with the above observations.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

rtr/-