ABDUL LATHEEF Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter has come up in reference by a learned Single Judge of this Court. The questions referred are:

(2.) According to the learned Single Judge, there are divergent views in the matter as expressed by two other learned Single Judges of this Court. In order dated 16.06.2009 in Crl.R.P. No.968/2009, a learned Single Judge of this Court held that there is no embargo on the right of the Public Prosecutor to file a petition seeking further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. In that particular case, the said court ordered a further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. on such an application filed by the Public Prosecutor. In Crl.R.P. No.968/2009, it was held that the learned Sessions Judge has not committed any jurisdictional error in entertaining and approving the said application filed by the Public Prosecutor under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C.

(3.) Another learned Single Judge of this Court vide judgment dated 27.07.2012 in W.P.(C) No.16812/2012 considered the question whether a Public Prosecutor can move an application seeking further investigation of the crime. The learned Single Judge held that the Public Prosecutor is expected to be impartial and unbiased and more so fair to the accused also who is facing trial. It was held that if at all he has got any sustainable grounds that the investigation has not been conducted fairly, then he has to bring it to the notice of the appropriate authority and get appropriate orders to see that necessary steps are taken for further investigation of the crime. In short, it was held that the Public Prosecutor has no locus standi to move such an application.