The petitioner is an agricultural Collie.He has four sons and a daughter.2.The petitioner claims that his son was originally appointed by the 8threspondent in his Biscuit Factory and that the petitioner's son fell in lovewith the 8th respondent's daughter.According to the petitioner, the respondents8 to 11 murdered his son in Malaysia in January 2007 and that the body is keptin the mortuary in Malaysia.On the above said premise, the petitioner claims tohave sent telegrams to the President of India, the Prime Minister, the Ministryfor External Affairs, the Chief Minister and the High Commission of Malaysia,seeking action against the culprits and also to make arrangements to bring thebody of his son from Malaysia.If the petitioner isfinancially sound, he could have gone to Malaysia and brought the body to Indiafor performing the funeral rites.(a) The respondents 1 and 2 are directed to make arrangements through theHigh Commission of India at Kualalumpur to bring the dead body of thepetitioner's son S.Suseendran who died on 28.01.2007 at Malaysia, to India andhand over the dead body to the petitioner, within a period of three weeks fromthe date of receipt of a copy of this order.(b) The 7th respondent is directed to register the First InformationReport and investigate into the same in accordance Section 4 I.P.C. and Section188 Cr.P.C. for the purpose of carrying out an effective investigation, the 7threspondent shall seek such assistance and such information from the Police inMalaysia at Bukit Puchong, Subang Jaya, as well as from the High Commission ofIndia at Kualalumpur.The 7th respondent shall complete the investigation withina period of three months and file a final report.No costs.4.The Superintendent of Police, Sivaganga District.5.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District.6.The Inspector of Police, Ilayankudi Taluk Police Station, Ilayankudi, Sivaganga District.7.The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Police Station, Paramakudi, Ramnad District.Finding no response to the telegrams, thepetitioner has come up with the present writ petition seeking the issue of awrit of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 7 or the 12th respondent toinvestigate into the death of his son and also to take steps to bring the deadbody from Malaysia for the purpose of performing the obsequies.M.Thikvijayapandian, learned counsel for the petitioner,Mr.D.Sasikumar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and2 and Mr.4.The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Town who is the 7th respondent inthe writ petition has filed a report.According to the said report, theInspector made enquiries with one M.Shiek Sabir who is the 11th respondent inthe writ petition and came to know from him that the petitioner's son allegedlycommitted suicide and that the Malaysian Police is investigating into the samein Bukit Puchong (Balai) Police Station No.Report Crime No.5.The learned Government Advocate also filed a report from the VillageAdministrative Officer to the effect that the respondents 8, 9 and 10 are notresiding in India but residing in Malaysia.6.The learned Government Advocate also produced the copy of a letterwritten by the Deputy Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department,Chennai-9 addressed to the Second Secretary, High Commission of India,Kualalumpur in his Letter No.71834/CITZ.II/2007-1, dated 27.07.2007 by which hehas requested the High Commission to get a copy of the Postmortem Reportrelating to the son of the petitioner who died in Malaysia.R.Rajagopal, learned counsel representing the Consulate General ofMalaysia in India filed a letter dated 26.06.2007 addressed to him.In the saidletter, the Consulate General of Malaysia has advised the petitioner to takerecourse to any of the two alternatives namely, either to make a report to thePolice Department in Malaysia or to seek an assistance through the HighCommission of India at Kualalumpur for making a Police report and undertaking afurther investigation.The petitioner claims thathis son was murdered at the instance of respondents 8 to 11 since his son was inlove with the daughter of the 8th respondent.Therefore, he has filed the present writ petition.Sub Inspector of Police, Tanur (1993Crl.L.J. 1098).Regarding the death of one Sulaiman, a complaint was filedbefore the Sub-Inspector of Police, Tanur (Malappuram District), Kerala, by hismother, widow and brother alleging that he was murdered at Sharjah, UAE by oneAli.The Sub-Inspector of Police refused to register the complaint on the groundthat the alleged offence was committed out side India.Therefore, the defactocomplainants filed an O.P. on the file of the Kerala High Court.For the purpose ofcompleting the investigation, if the 7th respondent is required to get necessarydetails from the Malaysian Police at Bukit Puchong, Subang Jaya in No.BKTPUCHONG/001045/07 dated 28.01.2007, the 7th respondent has a duty to get suchdetails including the Postmortem Report as well as all other details.A question arose in Ashray AdhikarAbhiyan Vs.3.The High Commissioner, Malaysian Embassy, T.T.K.Road, Mandhaveli, Chennai.

Cited provisions: Section 4 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 3 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 188 in The Indian Penal Code