GAUTHAM VISHWANATH Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed to direct re-investigation of the F.I.R. in Crime No.116 of 2017, on the file of the 2nd respondent herein which had culminated in S.C.No.170 of 2017, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Thanjavur, Thanjavur District by a competent officer on the basis of the petitioner's representation, dated 08.12.2017.

(2.) The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that on the complaint lodged by the father of the petitioner herein, a case has been registered in Crime No. 116/2017. The deceased is the grand-mother of the petitioner herein was murdered by unknown person for gain. Initially the said complaint was lodged by the father of the petitioner herein. After investigation, the second respondent filed a final report as against the own son of the deceased viz., the father of the petitioner herein for the offence under Sections 302 , 201 & 404 IPC. The petitioner is cited as L.W-1 in the final report. The said final report has been taken cognizance in S.C.No.170 of 2017 and it is pending for trial before the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court) Thanjavur, Thanjavur District. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the occurrence took place on 20.03.2017 and the father of the petitioner lodged a complaint alleging that his mother was murdered for gain. On the said complaint, the second respondent registered a case in Crime No.116 of 2017 for the offence under Sections 302 & 380 IPC. Thereafter, the second respondent conducted enquiry and they were not able to trace the assailants / murderers in spite of the fact that the scene of crime showes two new finger prints. Further, he submitted that the father of the petitioner was harassed by the second respondent under the guise of enquiry and they were put to unbearable torture. Thereafter, he was kept under illegal custody. He was compelled to confess the crime by exhorting undue pressure upon the father of the petitioner herein to confess the crime and thereafter, he signed the papers as directed by the second respondent. According to the second respondent, the accused made extra-judicial confession. The second respondent filed a final report as against the father of the petitioner herein for the offences under Sections 302 , 201 and 404 IPC.

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the second respondent without conducting investigation in a proper manner and without even getting the Finger Print, which was obtained in the house of the deceased, mechanically filed the final report as if the father of the petitioner confessed before the Village Administration Officer. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation before the first respondent / police for the purpose of investigation. Without considering the same, the first respondent kept the representation pending and now, the trial Court begins the trial. Therefore, he sought for re-investigation of the FIR in Crime No.116 of 2017.