IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2009 / 14TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 27998 of 2009(Q) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. PARVATHY, W/O.BHAGAVATHY, ESTATE LAYAM, SEMMIVALLEY ESTATE, CHEMMAUNU KARA, ELAPPARA VILLAGE, PEERMEDU TALUK. 2. CHRISTEENA.B, D/O.BHAGAVATHY, OF DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. VINCENT, S/O.PASTER VARGHESE, ESTATE LAYAM, SEMINIVALLEY ESTATE, CHEMMANTHARA KARA, ELAPPARA VILLAGE, PEERUMEDU TALUK. 2. PASTOR VARKEY, OF DO.DO. 3. AMUTHA, W/O.PASTOR VARGHESE, OF DO. DO. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEERUMEDU POLICE STATION, PEERUMEDU. 5. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, IDUKKI DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, PAINAVU, IDUKKI. 6. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (HQ), TRIVANDRUM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.C.NO.27998 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 6th October 2009 JUDGMENT This petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus directing respondents 4 to 7 to investigate Exts.P3 and P4 complaints, after registering the case against respondents 1 and 2 and also to arrest them. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners was heard. 3. Case of the petitioners is that Ext.P1 petition was originally filed before Judicial First Class Magistrate, Peerumedu which was sent for investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure and thereafter settled and after settlement of the dispute first respondent married second petitioner and then respondents 1 and 2 treated her with cruelty and therefore, petitioners were compelled to lodge Ext.P3 complaint before Superintendent of Police, Idukki and thereafter Ext.P4 complaint was made to Director General of Police. Wpc 27998/09 2 Learned counsel argued that police is bound to register a case for the offences under Sections 498 A and 326 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code as against respondents 1 to 3 and as no case is registered a writ of mandamus is to be issued to register a case and to investigate it. 4. When the case of the petitioners is that police has not registered the case in spite of a complaint filed before the Superintendent of Police and Director General of Police, as held by the Apex court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P (2008 (1) KLT 724) remedy of the petitioner is not to approach this court under Section 226 of Constitution of India but to seek the remedy provided under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. It is for the petitioners to file a complaint before the learned Magistrate. If so, Magistrate is either entitled to take cognizance of the offence after conducting an inquiry under Section 202 of Code of Criminal Procedure or sent the complaint for investigation under Section 156(3) Code of Criminal Procedure, in which case police is bound to register a case. With the liberty to approach the Magistrate Wpc 27998/09 3 under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, the petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.