IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 2854 of 2008(M) ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 55/2007 of PANDIKKAD POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ------------ K.ASMABI, AGED 39 YEARS, W/O.ABDUL KAREEM, KALLIDUMBAN HOUSE, SOUTH VALLUVANGAD P.O., PANDIKKAD (VIA), MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANDIKKAD. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PERINTALMANNA. 3. BASHEER, S/O.MOHAMMADALI, AMBADAN HOUSE, SOUTH VALLUVANGAD P.O. PANDIKKAD (VIA), MALAPPURAM DIST. 4. ASHRAF, S/O.MOHAMMEDALI, AMBADAN HOUSE, SOUTH VALLUVANGAD P.O., PANDIKKAD (VIA), MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. ========================== W.P.(C). No. 2854 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 31st day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner who is the de facto complainant in Crime No. 55 of 2007 of Pandikkad Police Station, seeks a direction to the Sub Inspector of Police, Pandikkad to conduct a proper investigation in the above crime and to submit a proper final report. The alleged occurrence took place on 28.04.2007 at 6.30 p.m involving two persons. According to the petitioner, eventhough the averments in the F.I Statement given by her would make out offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 452 and 307 r/w Section 34 IPC, the police registered the above crime only for offences punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 448 r/w Section 34 IPC and the charge sheet filed was also for the aforesaid offences only. The petitioner, therefore, seeks a direction for further investigation to be conducted by the 1st respondent. W.P.(C) NO. 2854/2008 : 2: 2. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the charge sheet in which the offences punishable under Sections 452 and 307 are omitted to be mentioned, her remedy is to file a protest complaint before the Magistrate and pursue the same. No useful purpose will be served by directing the very same officer to conduct further investigation. Accordingly, leaving the petitioner to the remedy of filing a protest complaint before the Magistrate under Section 190 r/w Section 200 Cr.P.C, this writ petition is dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv W.P.(C) NO. 2854/2008 : 3: