JOY KAITHARATH Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner, claiming to be human right activist, as a public interest litigation with the following reliefs:

(2.) Brief facts of the case giving rise to the Writ Petition are:

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the investigation report dated 19/11/2014, which was obtained by the Kerala Lok Ayukta on the complaint submitted by the petitioner, having disclosed a cognizable offence, the third respondent ought to have registered an FIR on the information submitted by the petitioner by letter dated 12/01/2015, Ext. P1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the mere fact that the complaint is proceeding before the Kerala Lok Ayukta does not preclude the third respondent from registering an FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to and relied on S.9(7) of the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1999. He further submits that in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Lalithakumari v. State of UP, 2013 (4) KHC 552 : 2014 (2) SCC 1 : 2013 (4) KLT 632 : ILR 2013 (4) Ker. 633 : 2013 (4) KLJ 686 : AIR 2014 SC 187 : 2014 CriLJ 470 , the information having disclosed a cognizable offence, it was the duty of the third respondent to register an FIR and even if the third respondent intended to hold any preliminary enquiry, the same could have been held within seven days and thereafter an FIR ought to have been registered.