BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 25/11/2009
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN
W.P(MD)No.10169 Of 2009
and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2009
Dhanabalan ..Petitioner
vs.
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu,
represented by its Secretary,
Home Department,
Fort.St.George,
Chennai.
2. The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City,
Madurai.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Sellur Police Station,
Madurai. ..Respondents
PRAYER
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to
order for reinvestigation of the Cr.No.102 of 2008, on the file of the Inspector
of Police, Sellur Police Station, Madurai City by the C.B.C.I.D.
!For Petitioner ... Mr.S.Muthukrishnan
^For Respondents ... Mr.S.C.Herold Singh
Govt.Advocate
:ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed praying for the issuance of a Writ of
Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to order reinvestigation of the case,
in Cr.No.102 of 2008, on the file of the Inspector of Police, Sellur Police
Station, Madurai City, by the C.B.C.I.D and to pass further orders.
2. The petitioner has stated that his son Sivasankar, aged about 30 years,
was working as a Manager in the ‘Best Petrol Bunk’, situated on the Thathaneri
Main Road, Opposite to E.S.I Hospital, Madurai City. The owner of the petrol
bunk belongs to Sathankulam in Tirunelveli District and he has been residing in
Malaysia. In such circumstances, the petitioner’s son Sivasankar, had been
managing the petrol bunk. Due to certain disputes, which had arisen amongst the
family members of the owner of the petrol bunk, namely, Mr.Daseerkhan, the
petitioner’s son had been threatened to settle certain accounts. While so, on
22.01.2008, at about 12.30 a.m., the petitioner’s son, who was working in the
petrol bunk had been murdered on the instigation of certain persons. A case
had been registered by the Thallakulam Traffic Investigation Police Wing-II, in
Cr.No.29 of 2008, under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code as if the
petitioner’s son had died due to a motor vehicle accident. Thereafter, since
stab injuries had been found on the body of the deceased, the case had been
altered, on 23.01.2008, as homicide, under Section 302 read with Section 109 of
the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner had also filed a case before this Court,
in Crl.O.P.No.3397 of 2008, seeking for a direction to transfer the
investigation to C.B.C.I.D and this Court was pleased to direct the second
respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 18.02.2008
and pass orders, in accordance with law. Pursuant to the directions issued by
this Court, the second respondent had directed the Assistant Commissioner of
Police, Thallakulam, to submit a report, on the basis of the petition
submitted by the petitioner. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Thallakulam,
had submitted a report to the second respondent, stating that investigation by
the third respondent was proceeding in the right direction. Challenging the
said report, the petitioner had filed a Criminal Original Petition before this
Court and since, charge-sheet had been filed, this Court was pleased to dispose
of the Criminal Original Petition, on that ground. The petitioner has stated
that the third respondent had not investigated the case, impartially and that
he is colluding with the real accused, as he has failed to include the name of
the real accused in the charge-sheet. In such circumstances, the petitioner has
filed the present Writ Petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
3. Mr.S.C.Herold Singh, the learned Government Advocate, appearing on
behalf of the respondents had submitted that, on 22.01.2008, a case had been
registered under Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code and on 23.01.2008, the case
had been altered and registered under Section 302 read wth 109 of the Indian
Penal Code. On 19.05.2008, a charge-sheet had been laid and on 20.10.2009, the
case had been taken on file before the concerned Sessions Court, in S.C.No.258
of 2009.
4. In view of the averments made by the petitioner in his affidavit
filed in support of the Writ Petition and on the submissions made by the learned
Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents, this Court does
not find sufficient cause or reason to grant the relief, as prayed for by the
petitioner, in the present Writ Petition.
5. From the records available before this Court, it is found that the
petitioner had already moved this Court by way of Crl.O.P.No.3397 of 2008,
seeking for a similar direction, as in the present Writ Petition, to transfer
the investigation to C.B.C.I.D. This Court had also directed the second
respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 18.02.2009
and pass orders, in accordance with law. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed
another Criminal Original Petition before this Court, on 03.09.2008, seeking for
a direction to transfer the investigation to the file of C.B.C.I.D. However,
this Court had disposed of the same, since a charge sheet had been laid, at that
stage. Further, the case had been taken on file, on 20.10.2009, before the
concerned Sessions Court, in S.C.No.258 of 2009 and it is pending trial. The
learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent had further
submitted that it would be open to the petitioner to approach the concerned
court, under Section 173(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code, for further
investigation, if the petitioner so chooses.
6. In such circumstances, the present Writ Petition is liable to be
dismissed and hence, it stands dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous
Petition is also dismissed. No costs.
vsn
To
1. The Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Home Department,
Fort.St.George,
Chennai.
2. The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City,
Madurai.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Sellur Police Station,
Madurai.