IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2008 / ]7TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3074 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.518/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, ALATHUR CRIME NO.55/07 OF MANGALAM DAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- TOMY IGNATIOUS, S/O.IGNATIUS, THEKKINKATTIL HOUSE, OLIPPARA, KAYARADI POST, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.PRADEEP SRI.S.KRISHNA PRASAD (AYALUR) SMT.S.SUJANA SRI.S.KRISHNA PRASAD (AYALUR) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADAKKANCHERRY, PALAKKAD. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANGALAM DAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DIST. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.3074 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of August, 2008 O R D E R Petitioner is the sole accused in a crime registered alleging the offence punishable under Section 435 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations is that the petitioner started a fire which spread to the premises of the defacto complainant. While the investigation was going on, the petitioner allegedly realised that the investigation was not proceeding on the correct lines. He therefore filed a complaint before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Alathur. The same is produced is Annexure-II. The Dy.S.P directed an enquiry to be conducted. A Circle Inspector conducted an enquiry into the grievance raised by the petitioner in Annexure- II. After such enquiry, Annexure-III report was allegedly submitted by the C.I. In the meantime, the Investigating Officer completed the investigation and filed Annexure-I final report before the learned Magistrate. Cognizance has been taken also. 2. It is at this stage that the petitioner has come to this Court with this petition praying that appropriate directions may be issued to the Magistrate. The counsel prays that the Crl.M.C. No.3074 of 2008 2 investigation conducted, which has culminated in the submission of Annexure-I final report, is totally unsatisfactory. Further investigation deserves to be conducted, it is submitted. The prayer is that the final report may be quashed. 3. According to me, it is for the petitioner to approach the learned Magistrate raising his grievance against the final report in the light of the enquiry report of the C.I. The petitioner's prayer for quashing the charge sheet cannot obviously be accepted at this stage. The petitioner can certainly make a request to the learned Magistrate to get a further investigation conducted under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C in the light of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case. It is for the learned Magistrate, on merits if he is satisfied of the need, to pass appropriate directions in the matter invoking his powers under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C or Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. The final report having already been filed and cognizance having already been taken by the learned Magistrate, I am of the opinion that the proper request to be made to the Magistrate is to direct a further investigation to be conducted under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C Crl.M.C. No.3074 of 2008 3 in the light of the decision in Shaji v. State of Kerala [2003(2) KLT 929]. 4. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed. I do make it clear that the petitioner's option to approach the learned Magistrate for the conduct of a further investigation shall remain unfettered by the dismissal of this Crl.M.C. If and when such an application for further investigation is filed by the petitioner, the learned Magistrate will have to consider the same on merits, in accordance with law and in the light of the decision in Shaji v. State of Kerala. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-