IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2008 / 24TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 21234 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SAKKIR HUSSAIN, S/O.HAMSAKUTTY, ALUNGAL HOUSE, MAMPUZHA, KARUVARAKUNDU.P.O, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ W.P(C). No.21234 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the defacto complainant in a crime registered at the Pathanamthitta Police Station as Crime No.670 of 2006 alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 468 and 420 I.P.C. The complaint was filed before the Superintendent of Police, Pathanamthitta and the same was forwarded to the police. Though the crime was registered as early as on 03.08.2006, the petitioner complains that the investigation has not been completed yet. 2. Thus the precise grievance of the petitioner is that an expeditious investigation has not been conducted. I have no hesitation to agree that an expeditious investigation must be conducted. But I am afraid, the petitioner's prayer for issue of direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be entertained before this Court at the first instance in the light of the decision in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P [2008 AIR SCW 309], the petitioner having not moved the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. W.P(C). No.21234 of 2008 2 3. The said decision in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P (supra) is authority for the proposition that the aggrieved individuals like the petitioner who have grievances about the inadequacy in the completion of investigation - either the quality of investigation or want of expedition in the completion of investigation, must approach the learned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate has ample jurisdiction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C to ensure that a proper and efficient investigation is conducted. The petitioner must therefore approach the learned Magistrate with an appropriate request under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. When such a petition is filed, the learned Magistrate must consider such application and take appropriate decision and issue appropriate directions. 4. With the above observations this Writ Petition is dismissed. 5. Hand over a copy of this judgment to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-