IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 10389 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. RAJESH K.R., 'PRATHEEKSHA' VARANADU P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 2. GOPAKUMAR N.G., NADUVILACHIRAYIL MAYITHARA P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. AJAYAKUMAR M., ABHISHEK BHAVAN VARANADU P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 4. SABU K.C., KADAVIL VEEDU VARANADU P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.MANOJ CHANDRAN SRI.P.R.AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE LAW & ORDER, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE KOZHIKODE CITY, KOZHIKODE. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE CRIME DETACHMENT, KOZHIKODE CITY, KOZHIKODE. 5. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY THE STANDING COUNSEL FOR CBI HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 6. ASHOK KUMAR @ JAMES, S/O.KARTHIYAYINI 2/87, KARAPPARAMBU P.O., EAST HILL, KOZHIKODE. 7. BYJU JOHN @ PETER WILLIAM PUTHENPURAYIL, PULLAZHI, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR. 8. D. SALI, DYSP, CBCID, KOZHIKODE 2/87, KARAPPARAMBU P.O., EAST HILL, KOZHIKODE. ADDL.R9. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CRIME BRANCH CID, KOZHIKODE. (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 17.9.08 IN I.A. 11683/08) ADV. SRI.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRY,SC, C.B.I. FOR R.5 SRI.K.JAJU BABU FOR R8 SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI FOR R8 SRI.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH FOR R8 R1 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXTS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PORTION OF THE PAGE OF MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DT.1.4.06 SHOWING THE ADVERTISEMENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT DT. 25.5.2006 ACCEPTING THE SUM OF RS.80,000/- FROM THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF DO. RS. 1,29,000 FROM THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF DO. RS.80,000/- FROM THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPTS SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE PAYMENT OF RS.30,000/- FROM THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY DO. RS.80,000/- FROM THE 3RD PETITIONER. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF DO. RS.30,000/- FROM THE 3RD PETITIONER. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DT.25.5.06 ACKNOWLEDGING THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS FROM THE 4TH PETITIONER, ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE PAYMENT OF RS.30,000/- FROM THE 4TH PETITIONER. EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DT.16.1.2007 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC 11584 OF 2007 DT.11.6.07. EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE SERVED TO 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P12A TRUE COPY OF NOTICE SERVED TO 3RD PETITIONER. /TRUE COPY/ R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.C.No. 10389 of 2008 J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners have come to this court again complaining about inadequate and insufficient investigation into the crime committed against them by respondents 6 and 7. According to them, they were few of the many persons who had been similarly cheated by respondents 6 and 7 (arrayed as accused 1 and 2 in the crime). Jobs were promised by prominent advertisements and gullible victims were induced to part with money. Crime had already been registered. The petitioners lodged their complaint later. No separate crimes have been registered on the basis of the complaints of the petitioners. But investigation into the crimes alleged against them is also tacked on to the investigation in the crime already registered as Crime No.344 of 2006 of Nadakkavu police station. 2. The petitioners had come to this Court earlier complaining about the inadequate investigation. According to W.P.C.No. 10389 of 2008 2 them, the 8th respondent is a senior officer in the Kerala Police and 6th respondent (A1) happens to be the brother-in-law of the 8th respondent. The petitioners perceived that absence of a proper and efficient investigation was on account of the influence which the 8th respondent has among the police officers and they apprehended that the 8th respondent was trying to shield the 6th respondent. By Ext.P11 order, this Court had directed that a proper investigation must be conducted and the investigation must be entrusted to a Senior officer of the rank of a Dy.S.P. In pursuance of Ext.P11, investigation was entrusted to such an officer. Investigation is not complete yet. 3. In the course of the investigation, the police have perceived the necessity to entrust the investigation to a specialised agency and the C.B. C.I.D. is continuing the investigation. Eventhough in pursuance of Ext.P11 investigation was entrusted to the Dy.S.P. of the local police, subsequently investigation has now been entrusted to the C.B.C.I.D., who are continuing the investigation as Crime No. 77 of 2008 of C.B.C.I.D., Calicut. W.P.C.No. 10389 of 2008 3 4. The petitioners even now complain of inadequate investigation. What are the specific grievances? First of all it is said that no separate crime has been registered on the complaint of the petitioners. I do not think that it is necessary. Investigation is being conducted in the crime already registered and that investigation takes in the grievances of the petitioners also, as submitted by the learned Govt. Pleader. In these circumstances, that a separate crime has not been registered cannot be reckoned as a sufficient reason to issue any specific direction under Article 226 of the Constitution. 5. It is then contended that the accused have not been arrested at all. The learned Govt. Pleader submits and the 9th respondent, who is now conducting the investigation, has filed a statement that every effort is being taken to arrest the accused. They are not available now. It is understood that they are involved in other similar crimes registered in other districts and every endeavour is being made to ensure that respondents 6 and 7 are brought to book. The petitioners are not justified in entertaining an impression that respondents 6 and 7 being influential, 6th respondent being related to 8th respondent, are W.P.C.No. 10389 of 2008 4 wielding clout with the police and that is why the accused have not been arrested, submits the learned Govt. Pleader. I am satisfied that their apprehension can be allayed by issuing appropriate direction to the Superintendent of Police, C.B.C.I.D., Calicut to personally monitor the investigation and to ensure that the accused persons are apprehended at the earliest. 6. This writ petition is, in these circumstances, allowed in part. The Superintendent of Police, C.B.C.I.D., Calicut shall hereafter personally monitor the investigation and shall ensure that the accused persons are apprehended as expeditiously as possible and the investigation is completed. Monthly reports shall be filed by the Superintendent of Police, C.B.C.I.D., Calicut before this Court, first of which must be filed on or before 1.12.2008. Call on 2.12.2008. (R. BASANT) Judge tm