IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 717 of 2007(I)
1. M.D.GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O. DAMODARAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M.K. DIVAKARAN,(MANAGING PARTNER,
... Respondent
2. M.S.BHASKARAN, (PARTNER, ESSEN BANKERS,
3. K.M.SUKUMARAN, (PARTNER, ESSEN BANKERS,
4. SOUDHAMINI DIVAKARAN, (PARTNER,
5. OMANA SOMAN, (PARTNER,
6. K.KAMALA BHAI, (PARTNER, ESSEN BANKERS,
7. JINU V.RAJ, (PARTNER, ESSEN BANKERS,
8. AJEESH CHANDRAN, KALARTHUTHIYIL VEEDU,
9. RAJESH KUMAR E.G., ELAYINETH VEEDU,
10. HARIKUMAR N.G., NANTHIYADU VEEDU,
11. RANJITH KUMAR .R. "ANEESH BHAVANAM",
12. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
13. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
14. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.SANTHARAM
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :01/02/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
----------------------
W.P.C.No.717 of 2007
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 1st day of February 2007
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the defacto complainant and he had filed a
complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate
Pathanamthitta alleging commission of offences punishable
interalia under Sections 420,406 and 468 I.P.C against eleven
persons. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate forwarded the
complaint to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. After
conducting the investigation, a negative final report was filed by
the investigating officer ( a copy of which is produced as Ext.P2).
Dissatisfied with the investigation conducted and the final report
filed, the petitioner filed a protest complaint, Ext.P3. In that
complaint, it was prayed that a comprehensive further
investigation may be directed to be conducted in Crime
No.797/03 registered on the basis of Ext.P1.
2. The learned Magistrate, by the order dated
28/08/2004 (copy of which is produced as Ext.P4) directed that
further investigation be conducted. It is the grievance of the
petitioner that inspite of the order passed by the learned Chief
W.P.C.No.717/07 2
Judicial Magistrate, no steps have been taken by the
investigating officer to conduct any further investigation.
Dissatisfied, the petitioner has come before this court for issue of
directions to the investigating officer. It is alternatively prayed
that in the interests of a proper, efficient and expeditious further
investigation, the investigation may be entrusted to the Crime
Branch CID.
3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor.
The learned Public Prosecutor, after taking instructions, has got
a statement filed by the Circle Inspector of Police,
Pathanamthitta. It is said to be filed in the office. A copy of the
same has been made available to the learned counsel for the
petitioner. I have perused the same.
4. In such statement, the Circle Inspector of Police
asserts that he had no information of such an order passed for
further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. This writ
petition was filed only on 05/01/2007 and the statement shows
that even earlier, the Circle Inspector of Police was aware of the
direction for further investigation. He had applied for the copy
of the order Ext.P4 as early as on 02/09/2006, it is evident. Thus
W.P.C.No.717/07 3
long prior to the filing of the petition on 05/01/2007, the Circle
Inspector of Police appears to have been aware of Ext.P4 order
passed by the learned Magistrate. No action has so far been
taken in the matter.
5. I have no hesitation to agree with the learned counsel for
the petitioner that a further investigation deserves to be
conducted as directed in Ext.P4 order, as expeditiously as
possible. In the nature of the action taken by the police so far, I
am satisfied that the petitioner is justified in complaining about
the inadequate and improper steps taken by the investigating
officer. The fourteenth respondent, the Circle Inspector of
Police undertakes to conduct a proper investigation. But I am
not satisfied with that undertaking. Considering the sequence of
events in this case and considering the nature of the contentions
raised by the fourteenth respondent, I am satisfied that this
petition can be allowed and appropriate further directions can be
issued.
6. This writ petition is allowed and the following
directions are issued:
W.P.C.No.717/07 4
(i) The police shall comply with Ext.P4 direction dated
23/08/2004 issued by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate
expeditiously.
ii) The thirteenth respondent shall ensure that further
investigation is conducted by a competent and efficient police
officer not below the rank of a Deputy Superintendent of Police.
Iii) Necessary directions in this regard shall be issued by
the thirteenth respondent within a period of thirty days. Action
taken shall be reported to the petitioner and to this court.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor shall convey this
direction to the thirteenth respondent.
Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the
petitioner.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
W.P.C.No.717/07 5
W.P.C.No.717/07 6
R.BASANT, J
C.R.R.P.No.
ORDER
21ST DAY OF JULY 2006