IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 26TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 27693 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. K. SRUTHI, AGED 21 YEARS, W/O. LATE MURALIKRISHNAN, SRUTHILAYAM, PATHILAKANDAM, NEELESWARAM. 2. LAKSHMI MARASYAR, W/O. LATE KRISHNA MARAR, AGED 70 YEARS, KOTTILA VEETIL, PUTHUR, P.O. ETTUKUDUKKA, KARIVELLUR VIA, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KASARAGOD. 4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILESWARAM. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILESWARAM. 6. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (CRIMES), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.C.No. 27693 of 2008 V - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners are the victims, who had suffered injuries in a traffic accident. The husband of the first petitioner and the son of the second petitioner, who had also suffered injuries in the accident, had succumbed to the injuries. The short grievance of the petitioners is that though a crime has been registered, no proper investigation is being conducted into the said crime. In these circumstances the petitioners pray that appropriate direction may be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution to ensure that a proper investigation is conducted. 2. I am afraid, the prayer of the petitioners cannot be accepted. It is trite that after 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), persons like the petitioners, who have a grievance about the investigation conducted, must approach the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction, who has a reservoir of powers W.P.C.No. 27693 of 2008 V 2 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to issue appropriate direction to ensure proper conduct of the investigation. With such a grievance the petitioners cannot rush to this Court directly with an application under Article 226 of the Constitution or under Section 482 Cr.P.C. without and before exhausting that equally efficacious and alternative remedy. I am unable to find any special or exceptional reasons which would persuade this Court to entertain this petition inspite of the dictum in Sakiri Vasu (supra). Of course the dictum in Sakiri Vasu (supra) permits such invocation of the jurisdiction in an exceptional case. 3. I am not satisfied that there are any exceptional reasons in this case. The petitioners must approach the learned Magistrate and request the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. If any such application is filed, needless to say, the learned Magistrate must consider the same in the light of the decision in Sakiri Vasu as followed by Vasanthi Devi (supra). 4. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (R. BASANT) tm Judge