High Court Kerala High Court

Rajan Mathew vs The Director General Of Police on 19 January, 2007

Kerala High Court
Rajan Mathew vs The Director General Of Police on 19 January, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 33908 of 2006(J)


1. RAJAN MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :19/01/2007

 O R D E R
                                  R. BASANT, J.

                         - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                         W.P.C.No.  33908 of   2006  J

                         - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                 Dated this the 19th  day of   January, 2007


                                    JUDGMENT

The plight of the petitioner is unfortunate. His younger child,

a girl aged about 13 years, Greeshma by name, a student of the 7th

standard had got ready to go to the school on the morning of

19.9.2006. Only her sister Reshma was available in the house at that

time. The deceased had got ready to go to the School and was in her

uniform. She had kept her books ready. At that time, her elder sister

Reshma, aged about 15 years, had allegedly gone to the bathroom.

The deceased girl was allegedly found lying in the bed on the cot.

Reshma made a hue and cry. The maternal aunt of the deceased, who

stays nearby, came to the scene. The child was rushed to the hospital.

She was pronounced dead at the hospital.

2. The brother of the petitioner, who had come to know of the

incident, lodged the F.I. statement by 10.15 a.m. The death had

occurred around 8.30 a.m. In the F.I. statement suspicion was

expressed. The girl had consumed poison, it was apprehended and

that apprehension was expressed. Inquest revealed that there was a

W.P.C.No. 33908 of 2006 J 2

suspicious mark on the neck. Postmortem confirmed that death had

occurred on account of application of constrictive force on the neck.

3. Sister Reshma, who alone could offer explanations, started

prevaricating about the circumstances under which her deceased sister was

found lying on the cot. Initially she said that she was found lying when

she saw her for the first time. Later she stated that Greeshma had hung

herself using a lungi. The lungi was seized. Sister Reshma is alleged to

have behaved in an odd manner after the incident. She woke up from her

sleep after seeing some nightmare and is alleged to have made certain

statements. Suspicion grew. There was a doubt that one Prasanth, with

whom sister Reshma was in love, had any role in the death of the deceased.

The needle of suspicion had turned to one person referred to as

Kuttichathan (Suresh is his real name) as Reshma, when she got up from

sleep had said something to indicate his complicity. Investigation

continued. Investigator was groping in the dark. A Sub Inspector was

entrusted with the initial investigation. It would appear that he did not

apply cellophane tape on the hand of the deceased and on her neck,

eventhough the neck had shown marks of violence. Vital input was thus

evidently lost.

W.P.C.No. 33908 of 2006 J 3

4. The petitioner has reasons to strongly suspect that the death of his

younger child is mysterious. He is not prepared to accept the version of

suicide. Absolutely no reason exists, according to him, to jump to such a

theory of suicide. Medical evidence does not with certainty point to the

theory of suicide. On his complaint, investigation was entrusted to the

Circle Inspector of Police by the superior officials. The Circle Inspector’s

investigation has also not led to anything tangible or acceptable.

5. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has come to this

Court. He submits that he is not convinced about the version offered by his

elder child Reshma. He does not make any specific allegation, but pleads

before Court that the failure of the police to resolve the misery is causing

him anguish and agony. Did the deceased commit suicide? If so, what is

the reason? Is there any indication that can help him to console himself that

it is really a case of suicide? Did his elder child Reshma have any role in

the death of her sister? Is she responsible for the same, either by herself or

with the involvement of someone else? The love affair between Reshma

and Prasanth was frowned upon by members of the family. Did Greeshma

see something which she should not have? Does her death have anything to

do with any such occurrence? Lisamma, the aunt of the deceased, who had

W.P.C.No. 33908 of 2006 J 4

came to the scene, allegedly asserted that she had seen a bath towel at the

scene, which is found missing later on. There are also some indications

leading to a suspicion that a car was available near the scene of the crime at

about the time of the crime.

6. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is

prepared to assume the worst. Even if his elder daughter were responsible

for the commission of the crime, the mystery has to be resolved and the real

truth has to be brought out. He laments before Court that the State may be

directed to conduct an effective and efficient investigation. Four precious

months have elapsed from the date of the occurrence. The police is

groping in the dark. The relatives are left in anguish and agony. It is

prayed that appropriate directions may be issued.

7. The learned Prosecutor, who was directed to take instructions, has

got the Circle Inspector to file a statement. In the statement nothing better

is revealed than the indications above. In paragraph 9 of the statement

filed the Circle Inspector, it is stated as follows:

“In this case the only person present at the house at

the time of occurrence was Reshma. She was questioned

several times as she stated differently in different times.

She stated that she has some doubt about Suresh @

Kuttichathan. More questioning Reshma will be adversely

W.P.C.No. 33908 of 2006 J 5

affect mental health of this minor girl that may be lead to

another mis happening in connection with this.”

8. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I shall not venture to

hazard any opinion. But the conclusion appears to be inevitable that a more

purposeful, meaningful, effective, efficient and competent investigation

deserves to be conducted. In the interests of truth and justice as also in the

interests of all concerned, it is important and essential that a proper,

competent and efficient investigation is conducted with the help of modern

technology to break the mystery and to ascertain the cause of the death. The

ones who are in charge of the case now appear to be unequal to the task and

therefore I am of the opinion that the investigation must be entrusted to a

Senior police officer not below the rank of a Superintendent of Police of the

Crime Branch, C.I.D. As the crucial task is to break the attempt of the elder

sister to stonewall and mislead, I am certainly of the opinion that

entrustment of the investigation to a woman police officer would advance

the interests of a proper and early resolution. There should be no hesitation

to make use of the services of advanced scientific and technological aids.

9. This Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. It is directed that the

investigation shall be conducted and continued by an efficient and

W.P.C.No. 33908 of 2006 J 6

competent officer of the Crime Branch police to be specified by the

Director General of Police. If a competent woman police officer of such

rank is available, certainly the first respondent should entrust the

investigation to that officer. Necessary directions in this regard shall be

given within a period of seven days.

10. Hand over copy of the judgment to the learned Prosecutor. Call

again on 30.1.2007 for the first respondent to report to this court the action

taken.

(R. BASANT)

Judge

tm