IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2008 / 11TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 29236 of 2008(E) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- RAVINDRAN NAIR, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 52, TRAIN DRIVER, RESHMI BHAVANAM, VEDARAPLAVUMURIL, THAMARAKKULAM VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT., HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NOORANADU POLICE STATION, NOORANADU, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NOORANADU POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(c) No. 29236 of 2008-E ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the de facto complainant in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.308 read with Sec.34 IPC. The accused persons, it is submitted, are influential political functionaries owing allegiance to a ruling political party. Because of such influence wielded by the accused persons, the police are not taking any meaningful action. The accused persons are roaming around in the locality and the police are not raising their little finger against the accused persons. In these circumstances, the petitioner has come before this Court complaining about the improper investigation. The petitioner had moved the higher officials of the police; but no useful response is forthcoming. It is hence that the petitioner has W.P.(c) No. 29236 of 2008 -: 2 :- come to this Court with this application under Art.226 of the Constitution. 2. Called upon to explain how in the light of the decision in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. (2008 (1) KLT 724 (SC)) which has been followed by this Court in Vasanthi Devi v. S.I. of Police (2008 (1) KLT 945) this application under Art.226 of the Constitution filed by the petitioner can be entertained by this Court without and before the petitioner exhausting his equally efficacious remedy available under law. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of the political influence of the accused persons this may be reckoned as an exceptional case. Sakiri Vasu which has been followed by Vasanthi Devi does contemplate an exceptioinal to the general rule in which the dictum in the said decisions will be inapplicable. 3. I agree with the law; but disagree with the learned counsel for the petitioner on facts. No circumstances or exceptional reasons have been shown to exist which can persuade this Court to hold that the petitioner's application under Art.226 of the Constitution deserves to be considered notwithstanding the ordinary rule propounded in Sakiri Vasu. The petitioner, I am satisfied, must move the learned Magistrate W.P.(c) No. 29236 of 2008 -: 3 :- with an application under Sec.156(3) Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate must consider such prayer in the light of the decisions referred above and issue appropriate directions on merits. Needless to say, if the petitioner is aggrieved by any such directions, the petitioner's option to come to this Court shall remain unfettered. 4. This writ petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above observations. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge W.P.(c) No. 29236 of 2008 -: 4 :-