IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2011 / 25TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13421 of 2011(C) ----------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------- SREEDHARAN THERAMBIL, S/O.MADHAVAN NAIR, AGED 61 YEARS, MEDICAL COLLEGE.P.O., THRISSUR-680 596. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, TRIVANDRUM, PINCODE – 695 001. 2. THE SUPERINTEND OF POLICE, PALAKKAD, PINCODE – 678 001. 3. S.I. OF POLICE, KOLLENGODE POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PINCODE – 678 508. *ADDL. R4 IMPLEADED 4. MANOJKUMAR A., AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. APPUKKUTTAN V., KARATTUPADAM HOUSE, THEKKINKADU, VADAVANNUR P.O., PIN-678 504. *ADDL. R4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A. NO. 9235/2011 DATED 15-06-2011. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. JAYASURYA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 13421 of 2011(C) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 425/2000 OF THE KOLLENGODE POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.13421 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 15th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Maneesha, sister of PW3 allegedly committed suicide by consuming poison on 16.12.2000 at or by about 3-3.30p.m. The Kollengodu police registered Crime No.425 of 2000 and charge sheeted one Suresh Kumar for offences punishable under Sec.306 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the police version the deceased was in love with the accused. At a time the deceased was studying in a college at Palakkad, on the promise of marrying her the accused took her to Guruvayoor on 16.11.2000 and both stayed in a lodge at that place. Therefrom, CW17 arrested them and both were remanded to judicial custody. Later, they were released on bail. The accused later resiled from his promise to marry the deceased and threatened her by showing the news paper carrying report regarding the arrest of deceased and accused at Guruvayoor. It is alleged that the accused instigated the deceased to commit suicide and which ultimately resulted in her consuming poison. Accused faced trail, was convicted and sentenced for the said offence. His appeal was dismissed. I am told that Crl.R.P.No.504 of 2010 filed by him is pending W.P(C).No.13421 of 2011 -: 2 :- consideration of this Court. At that stage, petitioner who claims to be the Chairman of an Action Council formed in connection with death of the deceased has come forward with this writ petition seeking a further investigation in the matter. His contention is that Maneesha was killed by PW3, her brother for bringing disgrace to the family. It is contended that records of the police case would show that deceased consumed poison inside her house but, no serious effort was made by her parents or PW3, her brother to save her by providing medical attention. In the circumstances it is requested that this Court may direct a further investigation into the matter. 2. PW3, brother of the deceased has got himself impleaded vide order in I.A.No.9235 of 2011 as additional fourth respondent. Learned counsel for additional fourth respondent would contend that allegations against him are false and that attempt is to somehow interfere with the trial, conviction and sentence of the accused which is pending consideration in this Court in Crl.R.P.No.504 of 2010. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that a fresh investigation is being sought in respect of an incident which happened 11 years back. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that there is no reason to direct further investigation. W.P(C).No.13421 of 2011 -: 3 :- 3. Learned counsel for petitioner states that the evidence of PW2, relative of deceased would show that he has seen Maneesha (deceased) in her house at about 10a.m on the day of incident. He heard loud talk from the house. When he reached there, DW1 (the member of local panchayath during that time) residing half kilometer away from the house, PW5, mother of the deceased and sister of the deceased were present. DW1 was asked to negotiate marriage of deceased with the accused but parents of the deceased resisted that. It is pointed out by learned counsel that the deceased is said to have consumed poison on the fateful day at about 3-3.30p.m at the corridor of her house in the presence of family members including PW3 (additional fourth respondent) but none made an attempt to save her from death. This according to the learned counsel is suspicious and indicate the role of PW3 in the incident. 4. True, Court has power to direct further or re- investigation into the matter notwithstanding that the accused has been convicted and sentenced, that has been confirmed and the matter is pending consideration in this Court. Question is whether such a course is necessary on the facts of the case. Though, petitioner would contend that it is PW3 who caused death of the deceased, absolutely no circumstance in that line is W.P(C).No.13421 of 2011 -: 4 :- placed before Court. A reading of the writ petition would show that largely the attack is against the trial court accepting prosecution evidence against the accused and convicting him. I have gone through the copy of postmortem certificate which states that death was due to insecticidal poisoning. It is stated that the deceased was a moderately built and nourished girl. There was no external injury on the body of the deceased indicating any violence. I am not satisfied that circumstances stated by petitioner make out a case for further re-investigation of the case as prayed for in the writ petition. It is also made clear that this order will not in any way affect the contentions that the accused may raised in the criminal revision he is said to have preferred. This petition is dismissed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-