IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2009 / 1ST ASWINA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1400 of 2006() ------------------------- CC.37/2005 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, MANJERI .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- KADOORAN AHMEDKUTTY HAJI, S/O.MUHAMMADEESA KUTTY, AGED 56 YEARS, VAKAYIL HOUSE, PANNIPPARA P.O., EDAVANNA VIA., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (CRIME BRANCH)NORTHERN RANGE, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EDAVANNA POLICE STATION, EDAVANNA, MALAPPURAM. 4. UNNI HYDER, PUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE, PANNIPPARA, MALAPPURAM. 5. ALAVIKUTTY, S/O.AHMEDKUTTY, PUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE, PANNIPPARA, MALAPPURAM. 6. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM. SRI.BABU S. NAIR FOR R4 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1400 of 2006 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd September, 2009 O R D E R This petition is filed for directing the first respondent to conduct a proper and impartial further investigation, either by himself or by some other junior officials not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, in C.C.No.37/05 (in Crime No.211/04), which is pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court. 2. According to petitioner, his wife and children were assaulted by respondents 4 and 5 along with few others. On a complaint filed, a crime was registered under Sections 143, 147, 148, 427, 452, 324 and 308 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Even though several persons were involved in the offences, at the instance of respondents 4 and 5, some of the accused were deleted from the party array, and a charge sheet was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, deleting offences under Sections 307 and 308 IPC. 3. Learned Magistrate took cognizance of the Crl.M.C.1400/06 2 offences and took the case on file as C.C.No.37/05. The case against the minor was made over to the Juvenile Court and it was numbered as C.C.No.36/2005. The petitioner filed several representations before Superintendent of Police, Inspector General of Police etc. requesting them to conduct further investigation into the matter and to implicate all the assailants in the case, and also to include major offences like Section 307 IPC etc. in the charge sheet. All representations were held up for years and hence, this petition is filed for a direction for further investigation. 4. On hearing both sides and learned Public Prosecutor, I find that a police report was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court. Admittedly, no steps were taken before that court to get an order for further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. It is also pointed out that no steps were taken by petitioner under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C by moving the Magistrate Court, as laid down in Sakiri Vasu v. State of Utter Pradesh ( (2008)(2) SCC 409). It is well settled that the police can, at any time, conduct a Crl.M.C.1400/06 3 further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C and for doing this, a formal permission alone will be required from the concerned Magistrate. 5. In such circumstances, I am not inclined to invoke Section 482 Cr.P.C. to pass any order as prayed for. Even if some other accused are deleted from the party, complainant has ample remedies under the Code to proceed against actual culprits for the offences which are actually involved. When other remedies are available, Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked. Petitioner, if so advised, is at liberty to seek his remedy in accordance with law, notwithstanding the result of this petition. This petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.