IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2009 / 13TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 500 of 2009() ------------------------ CRIME NO.682/08 OF MAVELIKKARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER: --------------- SASIKUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.GOVINDAN, SASIKALA BHAVANAM, ERAVANKARA, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.PADMAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKKARA. 4. VISWA PANIKKER, VIJAYA BHAVANAM, ERAVANKARA, MAVELIKKARA. 5. EBY, MAMPALLIL, ERAVANKARA, MAVELIKKARA 6. ARUN SREENILAYAM, ARANNOOTTIMANGALAM, MAVELIKKARA. 7. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.500 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of February 2009 O R D E R The petitioner is the de facto complainant/injured/informant in crime No.682/08 of Mavelikkara police station which is registered for offences punishable inter alia under Section 324 I.P.C. Crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. According to the petitioner, no proper and meaningful investigation is being conducted. The petitioner is aggrieved by the registration of the crime under Section 324 I.P.C only. According to the petitioner, more serious offences are revealed. The petitioner has thus come to this court complaining about the inadequate quality of the investigation conducted in the case. It is prayed that appropriate directions may be issued under Section 482 Cr.P.C to ensure the conduct of a proper investigation. 2. It is trite after the decision in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P & Others [2008 AIR SCW 309] which has been followed by this court in Vasanthi Devi v. Sub Inspector of Police [2008(1) KLT 945] that a person having a grievance like the one raised by the petitioner herein - of inadequate conduct of the investigation, cannot, without and before exhausting the equally efficacious alternative remedy available under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, rush to Crl.M.C.No. 500/09 2 this court with applications under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or under Section 482 Cr.P.C. I am unable to locate any special or sufficient reason to reckon the instant case as one to which the ordinary rules propounded in Sakiri Vasu (Supra) will not apply. 3. It is for the petitioner to approach the learned Magistrate with an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C and raise his grievance about the inadequate investigation. If such an application is filed, the learned Magistrate must consider the application on merits and take appropriate decision in the light of the above precedents and issue directions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. 4. This petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above observations. I may hasten to observe that if the grievance of the petitioner remains without redressal even after the learned Magistrate passes orders in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, the petitioner's option to come to this court again shall remain unfettered by the dismissal of this Crl.M.C. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner today itself. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No. 500/09 3 Crl.M.C.No. 500/09 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008