High Court Kerala High Court

Biju Kuriakose vs State Of Kerala on 10 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
Biju Kuriakose vs State Of Kerala on 10 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 17280 of 2008(F)


1. BIJU KURIAKOSE, S/O.O.C.KURIAKOSE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,

3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM.

4. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

5. S.I. OF POLICE, CHINGAVANAM,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.VIJAI MATHEWS

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :10/06/2008

 O R D E R
                          R.BASANT, J.
                       ----------------------
                     W.P.C.No.17280 of 2008
                   ----------------------------------------
               Dated this the 10th day of June 2008

                        J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is the de facto complainant/victim in a crime

registered alleging offences punishable inter alia under Section

326 I.P.C. Investigation is complete. Final report has already

been filed. According to the petitioner, a proper investigation

has not been conducted. The petitioner approached this court

and by Ext.P2 order in W.P.C.No.5290/2007 it was directed that

a further investigation must be conducted under Section 173

Cr.P.C. Further investigation has been conducted by a Deputy

Superintendent of Police. Further final report has already been

filed before the learned Magistrate. It is the submission of the

learned counsel for the petitioner that such further investigation

has not been conducted properly. I shall, for the sake of

arguments assume that the grievance of the petitioner is correct;

but the petitioner has a remedy under law to approach the

learned Magistrate to raise objections against the final report.

The position is made very clear now with the decision in Sakiri

Vasu v. State of U.P & Others [2008 AIR SCW 309]. The learned

W.P.C.No.17280/08 2

counsel for the petitioner submits that since Ext.P2 order is

passed by this court and in these circumstances the learned

Magistrate may not consider the application on merits.

2. I find no merit in that apprehension also. Since

further investigation is directed in Ext.P2 order all incidents of

further investigation will necessarily follow. If the petitioner is

not satisfied with the further investigation and with the further

final report that has been filed, the petitioner’s option to

approach the learned Magistrate and raise his objections shall

remain. The learned Magistrate must consider such objections

and issue appropriate directions if he is satisfied with the need

to issue such directions.

3. This petition is in these circumstances dismissed with

the above observations.




                                            (R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr

            // True Copy//       PA to Judge

W.P.C.No.17280/08    3

W.P.C.No.17280/08    4

       R.BASANT, J.




         CRL.M.CNo.




            ORDER




21ST DAY OF MAY2007