SHAHZAD KHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioner is that no effective investigation is being conducted into the crime registered in respect of a road traffic accident. The petitioner was the rider of a motor cycle and a friend/employee of his was the pillion driver. There was an accident involving a K.S.R.T.C. bus and the motor cycle which the petitioner was riding. The petitioner suffered serious injuries and one of his legs had to be amputated. The pillion rider succumbed to his injuries. Crime was registered under Section 304A I.P.C. It was registered not on the basis of any complaint by any one, but on receipt of intimation of death in a road traffic accident from the hospital. Investigation was conducted. The petitioner is deeply dissatisfied with the investigation that was conducted.

(2.) By order dated 14/11/2006 this Court directed that the Assistant Commissioner of Police under the supervision of the Commissioner of Police must conduct the investigation. A report was filed by the Commissioner of Police about the investigation that was conducted. The Case Diary was placed before me for my perusal.

(3.) In the course of initial investigation, the first Investigating Officer appears to have gravitated to the conclusion that the accident occurred when the two wheeler which the petitioner was riding attempted to over take the K.S.R.T.C. bus along the left hand side of the bus and tried to swerve on seeing a cyclist coming in the opposite direction. The said conclusion on the face of it does not appear to be inspiring as the accident is shown to have been taken place almost on the western half of the road lying north - south when both vehicles proceeding from south towards north. Later, in the course of investigation, the Investigators appear to have changed their stand and they put forward the suggestion that the petitioner was attempting to over take the K.S.R.T.C. bus along the right hand side of the bus and then the motocycle which the petitioner was riding had fallen on its left on seeing the bicycle coming in the opposite direction. The petitioner appears to have advanced a version that he was proceeding in front and the bus had come and hit on the rear of the vehicle in which he and the pillion rider were travelling. The cyclist has not been ascertained and identified yet. The report of the Motor Vehicle Inspector suggests that there was no hard impact between the K.S.R.T.C. bus and the two wheeler which the petitioner was riding.