IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2008 / 22ND ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 29212 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- CHANDRAMATHY AMMA.S, AGED 57, D/O.SREEMATIYAMMA, 'SAROVARAM', T.C.8/1552, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.ANIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CRIME BRANCH C.I.D., CRIME BRANCH HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CRIME BRANCH HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CRIME BRANCH C.I.D., CRIME BRANCH HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- W.P.C.No. 29212 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of October 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, a woman, has come to this court with this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer that Annexure P5 report filed by the Crime Branch CID, Thiruvananthapuram arraying her as the third accused in a crime which was initially registered under Section 420 read with 34 I.P.C against two accused persons may be quashed. 2. The sequence of events starts with registration of a crime No.480/08 at the Medical College police Station, Thiruvananthapuram on the basis of a complaint filed by one Sunil Kumar against two accused persons - one Sabarinath and one Bindu Mahesh. The crux of the allegations in that complaint is that the de facto complainant was fraudulently induced to part with the money by the accused persons whose transparent purpose was only to deceive him. Crime was registered. Investigation commenced. In the course of investigation, it is alleged that it was revealed to the police that the offence alleged has greater dimensions and repercussions. The investigation of the case was transferred from the local police to the CBCID. The W.P.C.No.29212/08 2 CBCID, Thiruvananthapuram continued the investigation and in the course of investigation, they reported to the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram by Ext.P5 report that in addition to the two named accused persons, there are six more accused persons who were brought on the array of accused as Accused 3 to 8. The learned Magistrate received the said report and directed that the report be incorporated with the case records. It is further submitted that in the course of investigation, further sections of offences have also been included and the investigation is now continuing for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 409 and 420 read with 34 I.P.C. 3. According to the petitioner, she is absolutely innocent. She has nothing to do with the activities of the first and second accused or with the financial establishments which they allegedly run. She has been brought on the array of accused without any justifiable reasons. It is her contention that she has been brought on the array of accused with mala fide and vexatious motives. She, in these circumstances, prays that the action taken by the investigating officer to array her as the 3rd W.P.C.No.29212/08 3 accused in the crime by filing Ext.P5 report may be set aside and Ext.P5 report in so far as it relates to her may be quashed. 4. Investigation is at a very early stage. The learned Public Prosecutor was directed to take instructions. A detailed statement has been filed by the present investigating officer, Sri.P.Reghu, Dy.S.P, CBCID, Thiruvananthapuram. In such statement, it is reported to the court that investigation has revealed the complicity of the petitioner. I shall carefully avoid any detailed discussion on merits about the allegations raised, their acceptability or the credibility of the materials collected. Suffice it to say that the investigating officer now has a case that the principal accused (1st accused) had entered into a conspiracy with others including the petitioner. Their purpose was to fraudulently induce depositors to part with their money. There was no serious intention to return the money back to them and the sole intention was to fraudulently deceive such depositors by inducing them to part with money. Representations were made in pursuance of the criminal conspiracy and amounts were obtained from such gullible depositors. It is alleged that the petitioner who was employed in and occupying important W.P.C.No.29212/08 4 position in the SIDCO had induced others to part with money. She was the brain behind the activities of the first accused, it is further alleged. Costly property was purchased in her name. The investigating officer submits that sufficient materials have been collected to array the petitioner as the third accused in the crime. 5. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor. I have perused the reports, documents as also the statement filed. This is not the occasion to weigh in golden scales the materials collected against the petitioner or consider their acceptability. Suffice it to say that the statement filed by the investigating officer shows sufficient justification for continuing the investigation after arraying the petitioner as the third accused. I do take note of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in Ext.P5 report, by which the petitioner has been brought on the array of accused, no detailed submissions have been made about the precise nature of the complicity alleged against the petitioner. But that inadequacy does not persuade me at this stage of the proceedings to invoke the jurisdiction under Article W.P.C.No.29212/08 5 226 of the Constitution of India or under Section 482 Cr.P.C to spare the petitioner of an investigation which is being undertaken into her alleged culpable activities. The totality of circumstances do impress upon me the need to continue the investigation and bring out all necessary facts. I find no reason to assume that any vexation is likely to result by the continuance of the investigation against the petitioner. To me it appears that the petitioner must co-operate with the investigating officer and reveal the details which are known to her and help in the proper conduct of the investigation. It is submitted that the petitioner is absconding and she is not available for interrogation by the investigating officer . 6. Taking all the relevant circumstances into account, I am satisfied that this writ petition only deserves to be dismissed. The investigating officer must continue the investigation and unearth all the relevant details including the specific acts of complicity on the part of the petitioner, if any. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.C.No.29212/08 6 W.P.C.No.29212/08 7 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007