IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 28TH MARCH 2008 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10544 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ N.GOPALAKRISHNAN, NISHAS, KARIYILAKULANGARA P.O. KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DIST. BY ADV. SRI.J.DEVADANAM SRI.VINOD J.DEV SRI.PRAMOD J.DEV RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- W.P.C.No.10544 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of March 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner's daughter Nisha met with unnatural death on 21/2/2008. A crime has been registered by the Kareelakulangara police station as crime No.68/08. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner is aggrieved by the nature and quality of the investigation conducted by the investigating officer in that crime. The petitioner has hence come to this court with a request that appropriate directions may be issued to ensure that a proper investigation is conducted in the matter. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner was requested to explain how, in the light of the decision in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P & Others [2008 AIR SCW 309] as followed in Vasanthi Devi v. Sub Inspector of Police [2008(1) KLT 945], the petitioner can claim relief in this application under article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the petitioner has not so far approached the learned Magistrate and reserving the right of the petitioner to approach W.P.C.No.10544/08 2 the learned Magistrate to seek appropriate directions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C to ensure the conduct of a proper investigation, this petition can be closed. 4. The decision in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P & Others [2008 AIR SCW 309] is authority for the proposition that a person like the petitioner aggrieved by the quality of the investigation conducted cannot rush to this court with petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is for such petitioners to approach the learned Magistrate concerned and seek appropriate directions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Supreme Court has held clearly that the learned Magistrate has jurisdiction to supervise, monitor and even interfere with the investigation, if a proper investigation is not conducted by the police. I find no exceptional circumstances to deviate from the said rule ordinarily applicable as held in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P & Others [2008 AIR SCW 309] and to invoke powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in this case. I have no hesitation in my mind to hold that in an appropriate case, such jurisdiction continues to be vested in this court to invoke the powers under W.P.C.No.10544/08 3 Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This, I am satisfied, is a fit case where the petitioner must go before the learned Magistrate and seek directions. 5. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed but with the specific observation that the dismissal of this writ petition will not in any way fetter the rights of the petitioner to approach the learned Magistrate for directions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C and if such application is made, the learned Magistrate, in accordance with the dictum in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P & Others [2008 AIR SCW 309] must dispose of such application. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.C.No.10544/08 4 W.P.C.No.10544/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007