IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2011 / 5TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).NO. 1749 OF 2011(P) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SMT.N.MINI, W/O.LATE E.R.NARAYANAN, EDAKKAD HOUSE, KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.R.REENA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY, HOME (C) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD, PIN-678 001. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD, PIN-678 001. 4. RATHEESH, S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, EDAKKATTIL VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. PIN-678 541. 5. RAMAKRISHNAN, EDAKKATTIL HOUSE, KUZHALMANNAM, ALATHUR VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. PIN-678 541. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== W.P(C) No.1749 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 25th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's husband was allegedly done to death by respondent Nos.4 and 5 on 06.04.2007. The Kuzhalmannam police registered Crime No.134 of 2007. Petitioner apprehended that the prosecution may be conducted by Additional Public Prosecutor, Shri Parabhakaran who according to the petitioner is a close friend of respondent No.4 who is a practicing Advocate of Palakkad Bar. Certain other allegations are also made against the said Prosecutor. In the circumstances petitioner made Ext.P7, representation to the Government to appoint a Special Public Prosecutor which request was turned down by the Government as per Ext.P8 dated 23.09.2010. By Ext.P8 Government informed petitioner that the Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor (Palakkad) is competent to conduct the case and hence it is not necessary to appoint a Special Public Prosecutor. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel asserted the averments in the petition and contended that it is necessary to appoint a Special Public W.P(C) No. 1749 of 2011 -: 2 :- prosecutor or the Government be directed to re-consider Ext.P7, representation. 2. All the allegations made in the petition are concerning the Additional Public Prosecutor named therein. I am told by the learned Public Prosecutor that there are other Public Prosecutors also at Palakkad (against whom there are no allegation in this petition) and hence it is possible that any one of those Public Prosecutors could be in charge of conduct of the case. Allocation of work among the Public Prosecutors is made by the District Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case I consider it appropriate and necessary, to avoid embarrassment to all concerned (without going into the truth of the allegations made in this petition) that District Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor could be directed to conduct the case by himself or allot the case to an Additional Public Prosecutor other than the person named in this petition. Such a direction is sufficient in the circumstance. I also bear in mind that if necessary, it is open to the petitioner to engage a Pleader as provided under Sec.301(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. W.P(C) No. 1749 of 2011 -: 3 :- Resultantly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of directing the District Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor, Palakkad either to conduct the case by himself or allot the case to an Additional Public Prosecutor other than the person named in this petition. Learned Public Prosecutor shall make available a copy of this judgment to the District Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor for compliance. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv