IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 7801 of 2007(D)
1. E.VINOD KUMAR, S/O. JANARDHANAN NAIR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
... Respondent
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
3. THE MANAGER,
4. M/S. SOBHA TEXTILES,
5. SRI. U.V.ABDUL RAHIMAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :21/03/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
W.P.C.No.7801 of 2007
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of March 2007
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a stranger and claims to be a dutiful
citizen. He has come to this court to complain to this court that
his complaint Ext.P2 submitted to the Director General of Police
has not been duly taken note of and no action has been taken in
pursuance of the same.
2. Ext.P2 relates to an instance of fire in Sobha Textiles,
Kanhangad. According to the petitioner, it was a case of fire
brought out by the persons concerned to justify the staking of a
false claim before the insurance company. Public money was
attempted to be frittered away and therefore the petitioner
wants a proper investigation to be conducted into that instance
of fire. As his complaint Ext.P2 did not yield any tangible result,
he has come to this court for directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C
and Article 226 of the Constitution.
3. Notice was given and the learned Public Prosecutor
has entered appearance for respondents 1 and 2. No notice was
ordered to other three respondents.
W.P.C.No.7801/07 2
4. The learned Public Prosecutor, after taking
instructions, submits that a crime has been registered as crime
No.370 of 2005 of Hosdurg police station under the caption “fire
occurrence”. Investigation is in progress. The learned Public
Prosecutor submits that considering the nature and significance
of the case, the Director General of Police has already directed
that Circle Inspector of Police, Hosdurg must conduct the
investigation and the investigation is being conducted by him
now. The learned Public Prosecutor again submits that the
investigating officer, in the course of investigation, has also
perceived the possibility of the fire not being accidental and that
aspect is receiving the attention of the investigator. No separate
crime can or need be registered on the basis of Ext.P2 as a crime
has already been registered and the specific aspect pointed out
by the petitioner in Ext.P2 is receiving the attention of the
investigating officer. The expert of the third respondent/United
India Insurance Company has also conducted an investigation
and there are conflicting views about the nature of the cause of
fire. The investigating officer is applying his mind to all the
relevant circumstances. Expert opinion has also been sought.
W.P.C.No.7801/07 3
The needful shall be done and the petitioner need not apprehend
that this aspect of the matter will not receive careful and
cautious attention of the investigator, submits the learned Public
Prosecutor.
5. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that no further
directions need be issued. I expect the investigating officer to
conduct a thorough and efficient investigation. It can also be
observed that the result of the investigation shall be
communicated to the petitioner by the investigator. Needless to
say, the petitioner shall be at liberty to place such material he
has in his possession before the investigator.
This writ petition is in these circumstances dismissed.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
// True Copy//
PA to Judge
W.P.C.No.7801/07 4
W.P.C.No.7801/07 5
R.BASANT, J
C.R.R.P.No.
ORDER
21ST DAY OF JULY 2006