SURENDRAN ACHARI Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed by the petitioner, who is the father of a young man by name Gouthaman, alleging that Gouthaman is missing and the petitioner believes that Gouthaman and Harsha, the girl he loves, are being illegally detained by the 2nd respondent who is the father of Harsha. On considering this writ petition for admission, we, on 12/11/2012 passed the following order:-

(2.) TODAY we have heard Sri.V.Prem Chand learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Tom Jose Padinjarekkara, learned Additional State Prosecutor for the first respondent and Sri.Vipin Narayan learned counsel for the 2nd respondent. It was submitted by Sri. Padinjarekkara, that Kottiyam police registered two crimes -Crime No.1924/2012 on the basis of the complaint submitted by the petitioner and Crime No.1939/2012 on the basis of the complaint submitted by the 2nd respondent. The above two crimes are being investigated by the first respondent.

(3.) WE also feel that the investigation presently being conducted at the level of the Sub Inspector of police will not deliver goods. We suo motu implead the District Police Chief, Kollam, as an additional 3rd respondent in the writ petition. The Registry to carry out corrections in the cause title. The Additional 3rd respondent is directed to constitute a special team for investigating into Crime Nos.1924/2012 and 1939/2012. The above team will conduct thorough and sincere investigation by questioning everybody who will be able to furnish relevant information regarding the whereabouts of the persons missing and will trace out the petitioner's son Gouthaman and Harsha, the 2nd respondent's daughter, at the earliest. If any useful lead is received in the investigation, the same will be conveyed to the defacto complainants. If any information comes the way of the defacto complainants, they shall readily convey the same to the leader of the team who is investigating the crimes. We close this writ petition for the time being. It is open to the petitioner or the 2nd respondent to apply for revival after three months.