IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 27824 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- SINAJ, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O SHAHUL HAMEED, PANAKUZHIYIL HOUSE, CHUNKAPARA P.O., KOTTANGAL VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.MVS.NAMBOOTHIRY SRI.V.C.SABU RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC : 27824/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH F.I. STATEMENT. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BYSEENAMOL. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FILED BEFORE THE JFMC, THIRUVALLA. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 22.07.08 FILED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUMPATTY POLICE STATION, BEFORE THE JFMC, THIRUVALLA. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE R. BASANT, J. ----------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No. 27824 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered initially under the caption “woman missing”. Later allegations have been raised of commission of the offence punishable under Section 366A read with 34 I.P.C. Investigation is in progress. Altogether there are three accused persons. The petitioner is the third accused. The victim/girl is a minor. It is alleged that all the three accused had allegedly committed the offences in furtherance of their common intention. The first accused did allegedly have sexual intercourse with the minor girl. Accused 2 and 3 allegedly facilitated the commission of the crime. There is no specific allegation that either the 2nd and 3rd accused did actually indulge in any sexual intercourse with the victim/girl. 2. Investigation is in progress. Final report has not been filed. The petitioner, at this juncture, has come to this court with the prayer to quash the investigation against him. 3. Notice was given to the learned Prosecutor. The learned Prosecutor submits that it is for the police now to decide whether W.P.(C). No. 27824 OF 2008 -:2:- the petitioner is guilty of the offences alleged or not. Investigation is in progress. It has not been completed. Investigator's option to complete the investigation and to file appropriate final report may not be fettered. This is not a case where investigation deserves to be stopped against the petitioner, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. I shall carefully avoid any detailed discussion on the acceptability of the allegations or about the precise offences, if any, which the petitioner can be said to have committed on the basis of the materials presently available. Suffice to say that, I am persuaded to agree that investigator must be given reasonable time to complete the investigation. Considering the nature of the allegations, the petitioner need not be arrested now, it is submitted. That submission appears to be reasonable to me. If the apprehension of the petitioner is of his arrest and consequent difficulties, petitioner must certainly seek anticipatory bail or in the alternative to choose to surrender before the investigating officer or the learned Magistrate and then seek bail. Appropriate orders must be passed by the courts considering the application of W.P.(C). No. 27824 OF 2008 -:3:- anticipatory bail or regular bail, as the case may be. I am not persuaded to agree that investigation against the petitioner deserves to be interdicted by any direction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. R. BASANT, JUDGE ttb W.P.(C). No. 27824 OF 2008 -:4:- W.P.(C). No. 27824 OF 2008 -:5:-