K SUNILKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed by the defacto complainant in Crime No.822 of 2010 of Sooranadu police station. That crime was registered on 18.8.2010 on the information given by the petitioner on the said day. Investigation was conducted by the Sub Inspector, Sooranadu. While so, allegedly in connection with the same incident and in which one Gopala Pillai and others are said to have sustained injuries, police registered Crime No.820 of 2010 implicating petitioner and others as accused for commission of various offences under the Penal Code. Grievance of petitioner is that while no action was taken by the police in Crime No.822 of 2010, they have submitted final report against petitioner and others in Crime No.820 of 2010. It is alleged that the Assistant Sub Inspector of police and the Head Constable of that station had destroyed the mahazar for scene of occurrence (allegedly in the house of petitioner) in Crime No.822 of 2010. Petitioner, in these circumstances approached this Court with a request to direct respondent nos. 1 to 3 to handover investigation of Crime No.822 of 2010 to the Crime Branch for investigation by an impartial and honest officer not below the rank of a Deputy Superintendent of police and to issue direction to respondent nos.1 to 3 to take necessary action against respondent nos.4 and 5 for reluctance in doing their duty and destroying evidence like mahazar for the scene of occurrence in Crime No.822 of 2010. Learned counsel while asserting the allegation made in the petition and requesting to grant reliefs as prayed for, has invited my attention to Exts.P8 and P12 and submitted about the tardy manner in which investigation for name-sake was conducted in Crime No.822 of 2010. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the Sub Inspector, after investigation of the case by incorporating section 325 of the Penal Code also has invoked section of offences apart from the section of offences mentioned in the First Information Report in Crime No.822 of 2010 and has submitted a final report in the court concerned on 14.1.2011.

(2.) IN Ext.P8 letter, obtained by the wife of petitioner under the Right of INformation Act from Sub INspector of police, Sooranad Police Station, it is stated that no mahazar for the scene of occurrence has been prepared (in Crime No.822 of 2010). IN Ext.P12 report, the Circle INspector addressed to the Superintendent of police, Kollam, he has stated no such incident, as pleaded by petitioner in his FIS, based on which Crime No.822 of 2010 was registered, has occurred and that no further action is required in the matter.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and on going through the relevant records I consider that it is appropriate to direct the Dy.S.P., having jurisdiction over the area where the incident allegedly occurred, to conduct further investigation in Crime No.822 of 2010. He shall look into all aspects of the matter including the complaint of petitioner as to the alleged drawing up of mahazar for the scene of occurrence in Crime No.822 of 2010 and its alleged destruction by respondent nos.4 and 5. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and the Dy.S.P., Karunagappally (having jurisdiction over the area where the incident allegedly occurred) is directed to conduct further investigation in Crime No.822 of 2010 of Sooranadu Police Station and submit final report in the court concerned. Until submission of such final report, proceedings in Crime No.822 of 2010 will stand in abeyance.