IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2009 / 15TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 19918 of 2009(Q) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- RAJEEB,S/O.P.C.BAPPU,PUTHIYAVEETTIL, CHANDROTH,ORUMANYOOR P.O.,CHAVAKKAD-680 512. BY ADVS. MR.S.SREEKUMAR, MR.P.MARTIN JOSE, MR.P.PRIJITH, MR.S.VAIDYANATHAN. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,TRISSUR. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,CHAVAKKAD. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,CHAVAKKAD. 5. KOTAK MAHINDRA PRIME LTD., THRISSUR BRANCH,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. B.VINOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.C.NO.19918 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 6th August 2009 JUDGMENT This petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus directing respondents 2 to 4 to register a crime on the basis of a complaint submitted to fourth respondent Sub Inspector, Chavakkad and received under Ext.P2 receipt and to investigate the case and to file a final report. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that one Shameer purchased Maruti Alto car No.KL-8-AG-4840 after availing a loan from fifth respondent financier and the amount is to be repaid in 47 equal monthly instalments and the payment is to be completed by 23/7/2009 and registered owner had gone abroad entrusting the vehicle with petitioner and on 14/1/2009 instalment of Rs.10,500/- was paid to the financier and petitioner could not remit the amount due on 15/2/2009 and when he had contacted over phone to close the amount within two weeks and on 20/2/2009 when petitioner was at Raj WPC 19918/09 2 Hospital to meet his friend who met with an accident, an unidentified person called him from mobile phone and asked whether tender mangoes in his property are for sale and petitioner disclosed to him that he will be available at 9 a.m at his residence and when petitioner reached his home at 8.30 a.m and parked the car on the car porch and went outside after a few minutes hearing the sound petitioner opened the door, found some persons taking away the car and though petitioner contacted the police and reported the matter to fourth respondent it did not yield desired result. Petitioner lodged a complaint and fourth respondent issued Ext.P2 for receipt of the same but no case was registered and no investigation was conducted though six months expired. In such circumstances, writ petition was filed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that along with the car a mobile phone and cash of Rs.5,000/- which were kept inside the car were also taken away. Learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that on enquiry it is found out that the financier had exercised the right of re- possession available and the contract and therefore no WPC 19918/09 3 case is registered. 3. If grievance of the petitioner is that a case is not registered in spite of the complaint filed before fourth respondent, remedy of the petitioner is to approach the concerned Magistrate for a direction for registration of FIR and proper investigation under Section 156(3) or to file a complaint. Magistrate can also take cognizance of the offence after inquiry under Section 202 of Code of Criminal Procedure. With that liberty petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.