M. SUBRAMANIYAN Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY THE SECRETATRY TO GOVT. HOME DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT,CHENNAI,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to give suitable orders to the CB CID to investigate the reasons for the death of the petitioner's son namely Raja Muthuramalingam alias Muthuramalingam in the Government Hospital a Tirunelveli and the facts and circumstances under which he had sustained injuries leading to his death and submit the report to this Hon'ble Court for further action including the direction for damages to the petitioner.

(2.) In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is retired from the post of Executive engineer in Public Works Department and his son was a recognised contractor of Thenthirupeai Panchayat Union in Thiruchendur Taluk and that he was Secretary of ADMK MGR Youth Wing; that on 22.4.1999 at about 11.00 P.M., the petitioner received a call from his son that he would come and meet him at Chennai; that when he was expecting his arrival, he came to know that the petitioner's son was admitted in the hospital, since he was suffering from severe head injuries ; that however, on 27.4.1999, the petitioner' s son died; that the 4th respondent gave a complaint on 23.4.1999 itself, but the 3rd respondent registered a case after the death of his son on 27.4.1999; that his son was alright even on 22.4.1999 and he phoned up at 11.00 P.M and that his son's death is suspicious; On such averments, the petitioner would pray to the relief extract supra.

(3.) In the counter filed in support of the writ petition, the respondents would submit that the son of the petitioner fell down from the wall of the residence of one Palanisamy and sustained injury on the back of his head; that the Sub -Inspector, Temple Police Station on receipt of the intimation from the Government Hospital, Tiruchendur went to the Government Hospital Tiruchendur and saw the injured in an unconscious stage; that the 3rd respondent recorded the statement from Respondent 4 about the fall of the injured and made entry in the Police Station General Diary about the incident on 23.4.99 itself; that a case has been registered in Cr.No.72/99 under Sec. 174 Cr.P.C.; that the third respondent being the investigation officer, he conducted inquest and took investigation; that the investigation revealed that the deceased was a womanizer and he had also committed theft and a case was registered in Cr.No.1209/94 under Sec. 379 IPC read with 511 IPC; that on the date of occurrence, while he was climbing on the house wall with intent to commit theft or intent to see the scene of husband and wife in their bed in a drunken state and fell down and sustained severe injury on the back of his head; that he was not admitted in the hospital by the police department as alleged by the petitioner; that the said deceased was punished under Goondas Act; that his name is in the Rowdy list of Alwartghirunagari Police Station; that the said deceased had indulged in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and tranquility he had been detained under the Goondas Act in Alwarthirunagari Police Crime No.193/92 under Sec. 307 IPC and (2)n 105/96 under Sec. 324 IPC Cr.No. 169/96 u/s 448, 353,294(b) 506(ii) IPC Cr.No.157/97 u/s 323,324,336 IPV Cr.No.280/97 u/s 294(b) 506(ii) 307 IPC read with 3,4 of I.E. Act ;that since the injured continued to be in unconscious state, he had been referred to the Tirunelveli Medical College, Palayamkottai; that inspite of repeated and effective treatment, the injured succumbed to the injury sustained on 27.2.1999; that soon after getting the death intimation, the Sub -Inspector registered a case in Tiruchendur Temple PS.