IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 18911 of 2008(B)
1. RETNAMMA, VILAYILVEEDU,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE HOME
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
3. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :27/10/2010
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.C.NO.18911 OF 2008
---------------------------------------------
Dated 27th October, 2010
O R D E R
Petitioner, the mother of Shaji,
whose body was found hanging on the upstair of
the house, being constructed by him, on
6/7/2006, filed this petition under Article
226 of Constitution of India, for a direction
to respondents 1 and 2 to appoint a Senior
Police Officer to investigate Crime
No.411/2006 of Varkala Police Station
registered under the caption “man missing” and
subsequently converted under Section 174 of
Code of Criminal Procedure. Deceased Shaji was
working in Gulf. He married Lyna and was
staying with her and the father-in-law and
mother-in-law and their children, since his
return from Gulf 1= years prior to the date
Wpc 18911/08
2
of his missing. Sunil, bother-in-law of the
deceased Shaji came to the house of the
petitioner on 3/7/2006 and informed that Shaji
was missing five days earlier to 3/7/2006.
Petitioner went to Varkala Police Station and
furnished the information of missing of Shaji
based on which Crime No.411/2006 was registered
under the caption man missing. On 6/7/2006
body was found hanging in decomposed stage in
the upstair portion of the building, which
was being constructed by Shaji. Petition is
filed alleging that there was no proper
investigation and though father-in-law and
brother-in-law of Shaji had sustained injuries,
suspected to be caused in the incident which
led to the death of Shaji, no proper
investigation was conducted. It was also
contended that wife of Shaji had illicit
Wpc 18911/08
3
relationship with one Sathishan, while Shaji
was in Gulf and on his return, on getting
information which was not originally believed
by Shaji, he used to quarrel with the wife.
Petitioner would contend that it was disclosed
to her that some times prior to the date of
missing there was quarrel between father-in-law
and the wife of Shaji with him and something
occurred and Matador Tempo Van owned by Shaji
was taken by Sathishan and it is suspected that
body was shifted. It is also contended that
postmortem certificate shows the contusion of
8x4x0.3 c.m on the right of front of chest 7 cm
to the right of midline and 4 c.m above costal
margin, which shows that death was not due to
hanging. It is also contended that close
relatives of the wife of Shaji are
influential and closed to leaders of the
Wpc 18911/08
4
community and it is in such circumstances, no
proper investigation is being conducted. It is
therefore contended that, a direction is to be
issued to conduct proper investigation by a
Senior Police Officer.
2. Though there was a direction to file
a statement, two years back no statement was
filed by the respondents.
3. Learned Government Pleader made
available the case diary. On going through the
case diary, I find that proper investigation
was not conducted. There are several suspicious
circumstances, which warrants a proper
investigation. Though Shaji was living along
with the wife and in-laws and it was alleged
that Shaji was missing five days prior to
3/7/2006, factum of missing was not reported
to the police, either by the wife or the
Wpc 18911/08
5
in-laws. The fact was not even informed to the
mother or other relatives of Shaji. First
statement recorded from the wife and father-in-
law and brother-in-law show that as stated by
the petitioner, petitioner was informed aboubt
the missing only on 3/7/2006 by Sunil, brother-
in-law of Shaji. Statement recorded shows that
according to the wife and in-laws, on the
previous night of date of missing, there was an
attempt by Shaji to hang himself, after getting
the wife hanged and as wife was not willing to
join the husband, the fact was informed to the
father-in-law. Statement shows that the
deceased had allegedly tied rope, which was
being used for the well on a fan. It was there,
even in the morning. If that be the case, in
the normal human conduct, if the husband is
missing from the morning of the very next day,
Wpc 18911/08
6
the wife and in-laws would definitely doubt
whether he committed suicide as there was an
attempt earlier. In that case, one would
expect them to inform the relatives of the
husband of Shaji or to make a thorough search
or at least inform the police. But that was not
done, what was admittedly done.
4. Though due to decomposed stage of
the body, external injuries could not be found
out by Dr.Rema who conducted the autopsy,
postmortem certificate reveals that there was a
contusion of 8x4x0.3 c.m on the right side of
front of chest 7 c.m to right of midline and 4
cm above costal margin. How this injury was
sustained and whether it is possible, in the
case of a suicide by hanging, was not properly
considered by the Investigating Officer. It is
also seen from the case diary that by the time
Wpc 18911/08
7
body of Shaji was found in the decomposed
stage, there were injuries on the body of both
the father-in-law and brother-in-law. Though
explanation was offered by the brother-in-law,
that he had fallen while sitting on a stool
and sustained injury and treatment record was
also procured, it is clear that considering
the nature of the incident and conduct of the
relatives, a proper investigation should have
been carried out. In such circumstances, it is
absolutely necessary to direct a proper
investigation, irrespective of the finding
arrived at by the Investigating Officer, based
on the registration of the case under Section
174 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
Writ petition is allowed. Second
respondent Director General of Police,
Thiruvananthapuram is directed to entrust
Wpc 18911/08
8
investigation of Crime No.411 of 2006 of
Varakala Police Station to the CBCID with a
direction that it shall be properly
investigated by a superior police officer not
below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of
Police. All efforts should be made to find out
the truth and complete the investigation
expeditiously and file a final report before
the concerned Magistrate. Investigating
Officer is directed to file report before Sub
Divisional Magistrate to send the records to
the concerned Magistrate including the FIR.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.
uj.