IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2009 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 935 of 2009() -------------------------- (CRIME NO.18/09 OF BAKEL POLICE STATION) ......................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.3 --------------------------------------- SAKARIYA T.A. S/O. ABDULLA, KUTTYALI VALAPPU, THAYALANGADI, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE C.I. OF POLICE, VELLARIKUNDU, HOSDURG, KASARAGOD, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL.M.C. NO. 935 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 17th day of March, 2009. O R D E R This petition is filed by the 3rd accused in the case to quash Annexure-A3. Annexure-A1 is a complaint sent to the Home Minister of Kerala with respect to an act alleged to be committed by two persons and it was ordered to be investigated by the police. Now Annexure A3 report is filed wherein two more persons are sought to be impleaded in the crime. It is on the basis of an alleged confession statement. The matter requires detail investigation regarding the involvement of the people concerned in the case. It is too an early stage to throw it out on technical grounds as the complaint is in the form of a grievance submitted by the defacto complainant before the Magistrate. So I do not find any reason to interfere with it at this stage. 2. So far as sanction u/s 188 is concerned now in the light of the decision of this Court in Muhammad Rafi v. State of Kerala and another (2009 (1) KHC 875(DB) Crl.M.C. 935 OF 2009 -:2:- this Court had taken the view that sanction of the Central Government is not necessary u/s 188 for investigation but it is absolutely necessary for an enquiry. We are not at all at that stage and we are only in the investigation stage. So it cannot be said that it is defective u/s 188 as well at this stage. Leaving open all the contentions that the parties want to raise at appropriate stage I decline to entertain this petition for quashing the complaint and therefore this Crl.M.C is dismissed. In case of arrest and moving of an application for bail, let it be considered on the very same day itself and appropriate orders be passed. The Crl.M.C. is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-