IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2009 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3203 of 2009() ------------------------------------ F.I.R. NO.341/2008 OF VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: --------------------------------- 1. PURUSHOTHAMAN, AGED 54 YEARS, THANKAPPAN, SWARUB VEETIL, VIZHINJAM VILLAGE AT VENGANOOR DESOM. 2. CHANDRIKA, AGED 50 YEARS, D/O.RUGMINI, SWARUB VEETIL VIZHINJAM VILLAGE AT VENGANOOR DESOM. 3. LAKESH, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN, SWARUB VEETIL, VIZHINJAM VILLAGE AT VENGANNOOR DESOM. BY ADV. MR.RAJESH P.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION. 4. SURENDRAN, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.ACHUTHAN NADAR RESIDING AT KALLUVETTAMKUZHI, ACHUTHAN MANDIRAM IN VIZHINJAM VILLAGE AT VENGANOOR DESOM. R1 TO R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.3203 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 10th December 2009 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused in crime No.341/2008 of Vizhinjam police station registered for the offences under Sections 427 and 447 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on recording the first information statement of fourth respondent, a neighbour of petitioners. First petitioner is an Assistant Sub Inspector of police. Second petitioner is his wife and third petitioner their son. Allegation in Annexure-A F.I statement is that on 10/8/2008 at about 5 p.m, fourth respondent along with his wife had gone to a relative's house and returned back only by 10 p.m. When they reached the house, granite stones were found scattered all around the house and the roof tiles broken. It is alleged that somebody committed damages to the house by throwing granite stones after trespassing into the property. It is also stated that there is nobody else on enimical terms with them except first petitioner and his family Crmc 3203/09 2 members and therefore, it could have been done only by them. Fourth respondent also disclosed that an eye witness revealed that it was done by the petitioners. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the FIR contending that their prosecution is only an abuse of process of court. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners argued that an offence under Section 427 of Indian Penal Code cannot be investigated by the police on its own and ingredients of the offence under Section 447 is not made out in the F.I statement and therefore, the case is to be quashed. It is also pointed out that even though the case was registered on 10/8/2008, final report is not so far submitted and even if, the case is not quashed, a direction is to be issued to submit the final report within one month. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the case is under investigation and Circle Inspector of Police, Vizhinjam investigated the case and Crmc 3203/09 3 investigation showed that some persons entered into the property of the fourth respondent and caused damages to the house, the identity of the miscreants could not be fixed so far and materials collected do not so far establish that it was the petitioners who committed the offences. 5. Offences were allegedly committed on the night of 10/8/2008. F.I statement was recorded on the same night. The case was originally investigated first by the Sub Inspector of Police and thereafter by the Circle Inspector of police. In the light of the investigation so far, admittedly the miscreants could not so far be fixed. I do not find any justification in protracting the investigation further, by not filing a final report as it is not disclosed how the identity could now be fixed. 6. Though learned counsel appearing for petitioners vehemently argued that an offence under Section 447 of Indian Penal Code is not attracted, on the ground that F.I statement does not disclose that anybody had entered into the property, materials collected at the time of investigation reveal that there was trespass into the property of the fourth Crmc 3203/09 4 respondent and damages were caused to the house. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that an offence under Section 447 is not at all attracted. Question whether it was the petitioners who committed the offence is a matter to be investigated. True, in spite of the investigation for more than one year, police could not find out any material as against petitioners. I do not find any reason why in such circumstances, the agony of the petitioners is to be protracted. Circle Inspector of Police, Vizhinjam, who is investigating the case, is directed to complete the investigation and file a final report within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.