IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2011 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 11258 of 2011(F) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SREEMATHI,AGED 56 YEARS, D/O.BHARGAVI,MALAKAVINPURAM,ARUVIPPURAM. NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADV. SRI.R.GOPAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. D.VIJAYAN,DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,NEYYATTINKARA-695 018. 3. ANILKUMAR,CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION-695 018. 4. CHANDRAKUMAR,SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA NOW WORKING AS SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,VATTAPPARA POLICE STATION-695 018. 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION-695 018. R1 & R5 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. MANU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.11258 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2011. JUDGMENT The prayer in this petition is to direct the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P5, representation, direct fifth respondent to register a case pursuant to Ext.P3, complaint and to direct the first respondent to order departmental enquiry against respondents 2 to 4 for what petitioner says, malafide act on their part. According to the petitioner, on 29.01.2011 at about 7.10 p.m. two persons trespassed into her house, outraged her modesty, snatched her gold chain and threatened to kill her. Petitioner was admitted in the Taluk Head Quarters, Neyyattinkara wherefrom intimation was given to the fourth respondent regarding the incident. Complaints were also given to respondents 2 to 4 on 30.01.2011. But, the Police did not register a case. On 04.02.2011 the husband of petitioner preferred a complaint to first respondent, Director General of Police complaining of inaction on the part of Neyyattinkara Police in registering a case concerning the incident. It is stated that fourth respondent has recorded the statement of petitioner and some other eye witnesses but, without registering a case. Hence this petition claiming reliefs as above stated. Learned counsel submitted that on 29.01.2011 morning, petitioner’s husband was assaulted concerning which also a complaint was preferred but, without any action on it. It is prayed that reliefs as prayed for may be granted. Learned WP(C) No.11258/2011 2 Public Prosecutor has submitted that in respect of the allegations made by petitioner in the Writ Petition and now at the time of hearing, a crime was registered by the Neyyattinkara Police as Crime No.199 of 2011 on 07.02.2011 for offences punishable under Sections 447, 294(b), 323, 354 and 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, after investigation the Police found the case as mistake of fact and accordingly a refer report was submitted before learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Neyyattinkara on 27.02.2011. It is also the submission of learned Public Prosecutor that the Police had given notice of the refer report to the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel however, pleaded that petitioner or her husband has not received any notice of the refer report either from the Police or from the court concerned. 3. It is not as if the High Court exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has to direct registration of a case. That is the function of the Magistrate under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, if properly moved. If the Police submitted a refer report it is not as if petitioner or her husband who gave information regarding the alleged incident is without any remedy – they on getting notice of refer report from the court can file protest complaint and the learned Magistrate can act on such complaint if there are materials brought on record. I do not find it necessary to issue any direction to register a case having regard to the circumstances which I have stated above. In the meantime if Ext.P5, complaint (It is seen from Ext.P5(a) that the said complaint was forwarded to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, WP(C) No.11258/2011 3 Neyyattinkara for necessary action) has not been disposed of, the appropriate Officer dealing with Ext.P5, complaint has to dispose of it as provided under law. 4. I also make it clear that if learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Neyyattinkara has not given notice to the petitioner or other person on whose information the case is registered, on the refer report (said to be) filed on 27.02.2011, learned Magistrate has to issue notice of that refer report to such person notwithstanding whether the Police has given notice or not and, after hearing them pass appropriate orders on the refer report. If the refer report has been disposed of by the learned Magistrate without giving such notice it is open to the affected party to challenge the order passed thereon in appropriate proceeding. With the above direction this Writ Petition is disposed of. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks