High Court Kerala High Court

P.M.Mohanan vs Union Of India on 27 January, 2009

Kerala High Court
P.M.Mohanan vs Union Of India on 27 January, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP.No. 33191 of 2002(B)


1. P.M.MOHANAN, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.ADICHAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

3. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHEDULED

4. DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BUREAU INVESTIGATION,

5. CHAIRMAN, AUTHORISATION COMMITTEE OF

6. DIRECTOR, INDIAN MEDICAL COUNCIL,

7. DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HOSPITAL, KOZHIKODE

8. DIRECTOR, BABY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL,

9. DR. ROOBAN GEORGE, NATIONAL HOSPITAL,

10. DR. INDIRA, GYNAECOLOGIST,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.X.VARGHESE

                For Respondent  :CGSC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :27/01/2009

 O R D E R
                         S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
                  ------------------------------------
                      O.P.No. 33191 OF 2002
                ----------------------------------------
                Dated this the 27th day of January, 2009

                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner claims to be a victim of unauthorised

removal of his kidney for the purpose of transplantation to

others. The petitioner filed this original petition alleging

complacency on the part of the Government of Kerala and the

police in respect of investigating the complaint properly.

Therefore, the petitioner has filed this original petition seeking

the following reliefs:

“i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 4th
Respondent to take over the reigns of investigation into
this notorious, kidney transplantation racket case, by
constituting a special investigation team and to book the
culprits and prosecute them in accordance with law.

ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st
and 2nd Respondents to pay compensation to the
petitioner, worth Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten lakhs) by way of
remedy under public law, and to realize the compensation
amount from the assets of Respondents 7 and 9″.

Admittedly, subsequent to filing of this original petition, the

Government has constituted a committee, who has gone into the

O.P.No.33191/2002 2

matter and a criminal complaint has been filed before the

appropriate Magistrate Court by the competent authority in

which proceedings are going on before the Court. In fact

Criminal M.C. No.11683/2002 in respect of the said case is

pending before this Court. The petitioner’s contention is that

he is not satisfied with the investigation by the local police and

the matter should be entrusted to the C.B.I.

2. I am of opinion that if the petitioner is not satisfied

with the investigation, he can approach the appropriate

Magistrate for appropriate orders regarding the same. As far

as the claim for compensation is concerned, this Court cannot

decide that question in so far as it would require adducing of

evidence to fix the liability as well as quantum. Therefore,

without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach the

Magistrate Court for appropriate action in accordance with the

decision of Sakiri Basu V. State of U.P. [2008 (1) KLT

724] and without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file

appropriate suits for claiming compensation, this original

petition is closed.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
Acd

O.P.No.33191/2002 3