IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 32813 of 2010(B)
1. BHAVANI PURUSHAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. SECRETARY, PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY,
3. STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
4. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
For Petitioner :SRI.MANJU ANTONEY
For Respondent :SRI.V.M.KURIAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :16/11/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 32813 OF 2010
=====================
Dated this the 16th day of November, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner claims to be the wife of one Sri.C.K.Purushan.
Petitioner states that some of her acquaintance told her that it
was reported in some newspapers that the petitioner’s husband
expired on 11/4/2009. In this writ petition, petitioner alleges that
she made Ext.P1 representation to the 1st respondent seeking an
enquiry into the cause of death of her husband and to assist her
to obtain his death certificate from the local authority. Thereafter,
complaining that there has not been any action on Ext.P1, this
writ petition has been filed.
2. From the pleadings in the writ petition, it is evident
that this writ petition has been filed purely on the basis of hearsay
knowledge of the death of the petitioner’s husband. Petitioner has
not shown that the 1st respondent has any statutory duty to
conduct enquiry into the cause of death or to require the 2nd
respondent to issue death certificate to her. There is also no
material to indicate that the death of her husband has been
registered before the 2nd respondent to require the 2nd respondent
WPC No. 32813/10
:2 :
to issue the death certificate as sought for by the petitioner.
3. In view of the nature of the allegations, this Court
directed the learned Government Pleader to obtain instructions
from the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent has vide his letter
dated 3/11/10, furnished his instructions in the matter. From the
instructions thus furnished, it is seen that no case of unidentified
dead body was reported to the 3rd respondent during April, 2009.
Thus, it is obvious that neither the petitioner is certain about the
death nor was the death registered with the 2nd respondent nor
has any case of unidentified dead body been reported to the
third respondent. In such circumstances, the prayer of the
petitioner for directing the respondents to conduct an enquiry into
the alleged death of Sri.C.K.Purushan and to issue death
certificate is misconceived and I am not persuaded to issue any
such direction.
Writ petition is dismissed.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp