IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2838 of 2008() ------------------------- C.C.No.1149/2007 of J.F.M.C.I, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- P.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN PILLAI, 'POURNAMI', CHAMPAKKARA, KARUKACHAL P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOBI JOSE KONDODY RESPONDENTS: STATE & RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR, TRAFFIC POLICE, KOTTAYAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM. 3. DIVAKARAN, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.RAMAN, KOPRAMBIL HOUSE, NEAR THALAYAZHAM PANCHAYATH OFFICE, ULLALLAKKARA, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CRIME BRANCH CID, (ADMINISTRATION), KOTTAYAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2838 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of July 2008 O R D E R The petitioner's son faces indictment in a prosecution inter alia under Section 304(A) I.P.C. It is a case of collision of two vehicles. Petitioner's son was the rider of a motor cycle, one of the vehicles involved in the accident. F.I.R was registered against the driver of the other vehicle - driver of a private bus. The third respondent was the driver of the bus at the relevant time. In the course of investigation he has been dropped from the array of accused and the petitioner's son was included in the array of accused. The petitioner's son claims to be aggrieved by the final report. He has not filed any private complaint. His grievance is that proper investigation has not been conducted and further investigation deserves to be conducted. 2. In the light of the decision in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P & Others [2008 AIR SCW 309] the petitioner cannot obviously come directly before this court with a prayer like the instant one. The petitioner can certainly approach the learned Magistrate with a request for conduct of further investigation. Crl.M.C.No.2838/08 2 The decision in Shaji v. State of Kerala [2003(2) KLT 929] makes it clear that such prayer for further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C can be made by the accused person also. It is for the aggrieved accused person to move the learned Magistrate for a direction for further investigation. When such an application is filed, needless to say the learned Magistrate must consider the same on merits and pass appropriate orders. 3. In the result, this Crl.M.C is dismissed making it clear that the dismissal of this petition will not in any way fetter the rights of the accused person to move the learned Magistrate for the conduct of a further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge Crl.M.C.No.2838/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.2838/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008