VASUDEVAN PILLAI Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the younger brother of the deceased. He is the defacto complainant in Crime No.512 of 2006. The said crime relates to the unnatural and allegedly suspicious death of the brother of the petitioner one Sasidharan Pillai, who was allegedly found hanging on a rubber tree at the rear of his house. The crime was registered on 20.10.2006. Postmortem examination has been conducted. The local Sub Inspector of Police, ie. the 5th respondent is conducting the investigation. The petitioner had come to this Court with this petition on 21.12.2006 complaining about the inadequate investigation conducted by the local police, ie. the 5th respondent.

(2.) The petitioner has enumerated various reasons on the basis of which he concludes that the police is not conducting a proper investigation. According to him, postmortem staining was found fixed on the back of the body. This is unlikely to happen in a case of hanging, submits the petitioner's counsel. It is further contended that without and before making any serious effort to get the chemical examination report, the police is jumping to the unnecessarily hasty conclusion that this is a case of hanging. The doctor who conducted the postmortem examination has not been questioned specifically on the postmortem staining on the back and fixed and also of blood marks which were found on the person of the deceased. It is further submitted that the deceased was allegedly having a strained relationship with his in-laws and no serious effort has been made by the Investigating Officer to collect and verify facts on that aspect. It is finally submitted that the son-in-law of the deceased has been absconding from the scene after the death of the deceased. This also arouses suspicion.

(3.) After the respondents filed a counter statement, the petitioner has again filed a reply statement in which he has made further allegations also against the Investigating Officer. According to him, the petitioner was taken into custody and harassed by the Investigating Officer with request to make available the photographs which the police had got taken by a local photographer. It is contended that the petitioner was kept in illegal custody. It is further pointed out that in collusion with the wife of the deceased, a totally false complaint has been filed by the police alleging commission of offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 452 & 354 I.P.C. In these circumstances, it is prayed that in the interests of a proper and effective investigation and in the interest of bringing out truth about the incident, investigation may be entrusted to any senior police offficial of proven integrity and competence. In the absence of such an investigation, it will not be possible to ascertain the truth. The petitioner and his relatives will not get the satisfaction that the true cause of death has been ascertained.