High Court Kerala High Court

Raveendran vs The Superintendent Of Police on 27 March, 2008

Kerala High Court
Raveendran vs The Superintendent Of Police on 27 March, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 5040 of 2008(Y)


1. RAVEENDRAN ,S/O. SREEDHARAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

3. THE CIRCLE INSPECOR OF POLICE

4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.REJI

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :27/03/2008

 O R D E R
                              R.BASANT, J
                      ------------------------------------
                     W.P(C).No.5040 of 2008
                      -------------------------------------
              Dated this the 27th day of March, 2008

                               JUDGMENT

The grievance of the petitioner, who is the accused in Crime

62 of 2008 of Kayamkulam Police Station is that no proper

investigation has been conducted before the final report was filed

against him. The learned Government Pleader after taking

instructions reports that the respondents have now taken

necessary action. Further investigation under Section 173(8)

Cr.P.C has already been ordered under Exhibit-R3(a) order. The

needful shall be done to get a proper further investigation

conducted. A proper further report under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C

shall be submitted expeditiously, reports the learned Government

Pleader.

2. In the light of the statements filed by the respondent,

the document produced and the submissions made by the learned

Government Pleader, I am satisfied that no further directions are

necessary in this Writ Petition now, the grievance of the petitioner

having subsequently been redressed by the subsequent action

taken.

W.P(C).No.5040 of 2008 2

3. This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed now as

unnecessary, but making it clear that the petitioner’s option to

seek further directions, in accordance with law under Section 156

(3) Cr.P.C, shall remain unfettered if a proper investigation is not

conducted.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-