GOPINATHA KINI Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent has filed a statement. The statement reveals that a crime has now been registered as Crime No.84 of 2007 of Kuthiathode Police Station on the basis of the complaint lodged by the petitioner. The petitioner has a further grievance now that the F.I.R has been registered for the offence punishable under Section 323 read with 34 I.P.C only and that, as a matter of fact, crime must have been registered and investigated of the offence punishable under Section 354 I.P.C also. The learned Public Prosecutor on the basis of the statement given by the petitioner contends that the statement does reveal only the offence punishable under Section 323 I.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioner on the other hand submits that Ext.P4 complaint reveals the offence punishable under Section 354 I.P.C also. In Ext.P4, complaint is raised against inaction of the police on the earlier complaint filed.

(2.) There cannot be a grievance, on the basis of the statement which has now been registered as the F.I statement, that the offence under Section 354 I.P.C is also specifically revealed. However, the petitioner can give statement before the Investigating Officer and if in the course of investigation any other offence is revealed, necessary and suitable action shall be taken by the Investigating Officer.

(3.) The petitioner has no other grievance also. In these circumstances, I am satisfied, that no further directions need be issued in the matter. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above observations.