IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 33146 of 2006(U)
1. JOSEPH AMBROSE,
... Petitioner
2. DEVARAJAN, S/O.JOSEPH AMBROSE,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
3. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
6. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.SUBASH CHANDRA BOSE
For Respondent :SRI.S.SREEKUMAR, SC FOR CBI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :26/02/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
W.P(C).No.33146 of 2006
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of February, 2007
JUDGMENT
The grievance of the petitioners is that no proper investigation
is being conducted into the circumstances under which the 1st
petitioner’s son and the 2nd petitioner’s brother one Aloscius Ambrose
@ Baby, aged 48 years met with his death on the night of 18.07.2006.
The deceased had come home from his place of employment abroad
on a short visit to see his wife who had undergone an operation. The
dead body of the deceased was found in the morning of 19.07.2006 in
a pit having a depth of about 25 feet. There was no symptom of the
deceased falling down and it was in these circumstances that
suspicions arose about the cause of death.
2. Initially it was registered as a crime under the caption
“unnatural death” under Section 174 Cr.P.C. Investigation is in
progress. The grievance of the petitioners is that no proper
investigation is being conducted. They have a further grievance that
the 7th respondent, the Circle Inspector of Police, Kundara Police
Station at the relevant period had made substantial progress in the
investigation. But the active efforts made by him did not succeed as
he was transferred – allegedly with mala fide objectives by the powers
that be in the course of investigation.
W.P(C).No.33146 of 2006 2
3. Respondents 1,2 and 4 to 6 have appeared through Public
Prosecutor. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the
needful is being done for the proper conduct of the investigation. It is
submitted that the investigators have now come to realise that it was
not a case of accidental death and it is a case of homicide. Proper
investigation in that direction is being conducted and it is not
necessary to transfer the investigation to the Central Bureau of
Investigation-the 3rd respondent, as requested by the petitioners,
submits the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The relevant materials have been considered by me. The
7th respondent was brought in the array of parties at the request of
the petitioners. The 7th respondent submits that though he had not
formally taken over the investigation, he had visited the spot of
occurrence and had given guidance and instructions to the Sub
Inspector of Police for the proper conduct of the investigation. He
had also collected information from secret sources among the local
people. But it is incorrect to say that he had conducted any
investigation directly. During the time of his supervision/guidance of
the investigation of the Sub Inspector of Police, the decision to
register a grave crime had not been taken also.
5. The alleged incident had taken place as early as on
19.07.2006. The investigators have not reached any specific
conclusion about the persons responsible for the homicide. Period of
W.P(C).No.33146 of 2006 3
about six months has already elapsed from the date of the offence. I
am satisfied that there is merit in the submission of the learned
counsel for the petitioners that the investigation must now be
entrusted to more competent and specialised agency. Having
considered all the relevant inputs, I am satisfied that there can be a
direction to the Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Kollam to take over
the investigation and get the same conducted under his direct
supervision by an officer not below the rank of a Deputy
Superintendent of Police. In as much as the petitioners submit and
the 7th respondent also accepts that he had supervised the
investigation and had collected information from secret sources of the
local people, I am satisfied that the Investigating Officer must
question and take assistance by collecting information from the 7th
respondent also for the proper conduct of the investigation.
6. This Writ Petition is accordingly allowed to the extent
indicated above. Necessary orders to entrust the investigation to the
Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch C.I.D, Kollam shall be issued
by the 2nd respondent within a period of 3 weeks under intimation to
the petitioners. Compliance shall be reported to this Court also. A
copy of this judgment shall be furnished to the learned Public
Prosecutor forthwith for communicating the same to the 2nd
respondent.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-
W.P(C).No.33146 of 2006 4