IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 5021 of 2008(W)
1. MOHANAN S/O. KUNHACHAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,PALAKKAD
... Respondent
2. C.I.OF POLICE, MANNARKKAD POLICE
3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
4. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY
For Petitioner :SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :19/02/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
W.P.C.No.5021 of 2008
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of February 2008
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is the de facto complainant in crime
No.62/06 registered at the Kongad police station, Palakkad. In
that complaint, he had raised allegations of matrimonial cruelty
against his deceased daughter by her husband Suresh
S/o.Ramakrishnan. Investigation is now complete. Final report
has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken by the
learned Magistrate and a case is pending as C.C.No.286/2006
before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II,
Palakkad. The prosecution is launched under Section 498A
I.P.C.
2. According to the petitioner, the final report has been
filed without any proper investigation. When the petitioner
received summons as witness in that case, i.e. C.C.No.286/06,
the petitioner wanted the Prosecutor to ensure that a further
investigation is conducted. The Prosecutor or the investigating
officer have not taken any steps. The petitioner, in these
circumstances, has come to this court with a request that
W.P.C.No.5021/08 2
directions may be issued invoking the powers under Article 226
of the Constitution to direct further investigation in the matter.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner was requested
to explain how in the light of the decision in Sakri Vasu v. State
of U.P & Others [2008 AIR SCW 309] said directions can be
issued. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned
Magistrate and make appropriate request for the conduct of
further investigation. The petitioner must explain such request
before the learned Magistrate and seek further directions from
the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate is invested with
sufficient powers under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C to direct further
investigation at the instance of the petitioner if sufficient
grounds are made out. Without and before the petitioner seeks
such remedy, I am satisfied that it is not necessary for this court
to invoke the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution and
issue any directions. Inasmuch as the petitioner has an
efficacious alternative remedy to move the learned Magistrate
with the prayer under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. I am satisfied that
it is not necessary to issue any directions invoking the powers
under Article 226 of the Constitution.
W.P.C.No.5021/08 3
4. This writ petition is in these circumstances dismissed
but it is made clear that the dismissal of this writ petition will not
in any way fetter the rights of the petitioner to move the learned
Magistrate for issue of appropriate directions under Section 173
(8) Cr.P.C. If such request is made, needless to say, the learned
Magistrate must consider such request and pass appropriate
orders on merits.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
// True Copy// PA to Judge
W.P.C.No.5021/08 4
W.P.C.No.5021/08 5
R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.CNo.
ORDER
21ST DAY OF MAY2007