IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 30524 of 2008(H)
1. SURESH @ AKHIL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :16/10/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). No. 30524 OF 2008
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of October, 2008
JUDGMENT
The petitioners face allegations in a crime registered
alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 326 and
308 read with Section 34 IPC. The alleged incident took place on
28.08.08. In the FI statement given by the mother of the victim,
the petitioners are named and the said FI statement is recorded
on 30.08.08. Investigation is in progress. Petitioners have not
been arrested so far.
2. Petitioners have come to this Court at this stage with a
prayer that directions may be issued under Section 482 Cr.P.C to
entrust the investigation to competent superior officers of the
police. It is the grievance of the petitioners that local police is not
conducting a proper investigation. They have animosity against
the petitioners. They are convinced that the petitioners are not
involved in the crime. But unnecessary vexatious proceedings
against the petitioners are continuing.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners laboriously
contends that there are several circumstances which would
W.P.(C). No. 30524 OF 2008
-:2:-
indicate that the local police are raising false allegations without
bonafidies against th petitioners. It is hence prayed that the
jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked.
4. After the decision in Sakri Vasu v. State of U.P.[2008
(1) KLT 724(SC)] , it is trite that a person with a grievance against
the improper conduct of the investigation cannot rush to this Court
with application under Section 482 Cr.P.C or under Article 226 of
the Constitution. Unless compelling reasons are there, such
petitions cannot be entertained without and before such aggrieved
persons exhaust the equally efficacious alternative remedy
available to them under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
5. I shall carefully avoid any expression of opinion on the
grievances raised by the petitioners against the conduct of the
investigation. Suffice to say that the petitioners must approach the
learned Magistrate with their grievance and seek appropriate
directions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for
the petitioners submits that the case on hand may be treated as
one of exception to the rule under Sakri Vasu (supra). That
decision cannot apply in as much as the petitioners face
W.P.(C). No. 30524 OF 2008
-:3:-
allegations for serious non bailable offences and they apprehend
that if they appear before the learned Magistrate, the police may
arrest them, submits counsel. I am not persuaded to reckon that
as a sufficient circumstance which should persuade this Court to
entertain this application under Article 226 of the Constitution,
notwithstanding the dictum in Sakri Vasu (supra). Petitioners can
approach the learned Magistrate and seek appropriate directions.
If they approach the learned Magistrate, the learned Magistrate
will have to consider their grievance and issue appropriate
directions.
With the above observations this Writ Petition is dismissed.
R. BASANT, JUDGE
ttb
W.P.(C). No. 30524 OF 2008
-:4:-
W.P.(C). No. 30524 OF 2008
-:5:-