SUMITH Vs. SHAREEF S.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order of mine shall dispose of two cases; W.P.(C) No.30885 of 2019 titled as Sanalkumar v. City Police Commissioner, Kollam and others, Kollam and OP (MAC) No.67 of 2022 titled as Sumith v. Shareef S and others. Both the writ petitions are arising out of a cause of action ie., an accident alleged to have occurred on 27/4/2017. On the aforementioned date at 4.30 p.m one Sumith, petitioner in OP (MAC) No.67 of 2022 was riding a TVS Scooter bearing Reg. No.KL 2 AK 3318 through the Paravoor - Chathannoor Road from south to north direction and when reached near Prasanna Theatre Junction, Nedungola, a car bearing Reg. No.TN 02 X 6274 from the pocket road driven by one Sanal Kumar, petitioner in W.P.(C) No.30885 of 2019 hit the scooter, result of which injuries were caused to Sri.Sumith. Police on the basis of the aforementioned accident, registered a crime case No.1195/2017 of Paravoor Police Station against Sri.Sanal Kumar and Sri.Sumith.

(2.) Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.30885 of 2019 has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

(3.) This Court vide order dtd. 11/12/2019 while issuing notice to respondents 3 to 5 granted the interim order as prayed for, for a period of one month and continued from time to time. The prayer sought by the petitioner, Sanalkumar who has been branded as a Driver in the criminal case whereby a police report under Sec. 173(2) as criminal case No.14 of 2018 has been filed, which is sought to be quashed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The law with regard to the entertainment of the writ petition under Article 226 is no longer res integra and in as much as that in SB Thambe vs. HY Dage and Ors (2016 (6) SCC 277), it has been held that if a person is aggrieved of, a lack of proper investigation and remedy would not lie under Article 226 but elsewhere ie., under Sec. 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. Similar is the ratio in Sakiri Vasu v. State of UP (AIR 2008 SC 907). Since the proceedings under the MACT were continuing, a very novel method at the instance of another co-accused, Sri.Sumith, who was also a relative of the petitioner, an O.P has been filed with the following prayer: