IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22337 of 2009(Q) ----------------------------------------- O.S.NO.337/08 OF MUNSIFF COURT, THODUPUZHA ------ (CRIME NO.98/09 OF KANJAR POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- ASHARAF, S/O.MUHAMMED RAVOOTHER, 'VARIKKAMANNIL HOUSE', NEAR ERAKKUMPALAM, ELAMDESAMKARA, VELLIYAMATTAM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.SAJAN MANNALI RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANJAR POLICE STATION, KANJAR, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. ASST.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CRIME BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, C/O. OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P.A. SALIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.22337 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2009 ORDER Father of Fasil, who died by drowning in a river at about 4 p.m. On 16.3.2009, filed this writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to handover investigation of Crime No.98/2009 of Kanjar Police Station to crime branch and also for a writ of mandamus directing Inspector General of Police to consider and dispose of Exhibit .P7 representation. The case of the petitioner is that there has been no proper investigation on the death of Fasil and his son had not gone to take bath in the river at any time earlier. It is also contended that the relationship of the petitioner with his relatives were strained and there was civil litigations and because of the enmity, the son was taken to the river and thereafter he was pushed into the river and murdered are the relevant aspects are to be properly investigated. It is also contended that subsequent to the death, when petitioner is taking steps for proper investigation, he got threatening calls and it could only be because death of his son was not an accident but 2 was a homicide due to the enmity with the petitioner. The Circle Inspector of Police, Kanjar filed a statement showing the details of the investigation conducted. The case diary was also made available. The entire case diary was perused. 2. The First Information Statement is seen recorded on 16.3.2009 at 8.30 p.m. and even in the First Information Statement, petitioner himself has stated that deceased Fasil had gone to the river with three other boys by name Amman, Afsal and Faisal and one Muhammad and Sunny heard the cry of the other boys and rushed to the spot and brought the drowning Fasil to the shore and thereafter took him to the hospital from where the boy died. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the first information statement seen in the Case Diary is not the one given by the petitioner and only his signature was obtained. But I find that there is no such case for the petitioner either in the petition or even when petitioner filed a petition before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thodupuzha for proper investigation or in the complaint filed to the Chief Minister 3 for proper investigation. If instead of recording the first information statement, he was made to give only his signatures, at least subsequently petitioner would have raised such a plea. 4. The Case Diary reveals that statements of the three other boys as well as Muhammad and sunny who had rushed there and took the body from the river were recorded and their versions are identical. It shows that the deceased boy along with three other boys had gone to take bath and the deceased boy ran first towards the river and jumped into the river and finding him drowning, the other boys cried aloud and hearing it Muhammad and Sunny rushed to the spot and tried to save him but in vain. 5. On going through the entire Case Diary, I find that entire aspects were properly investigated by the Investigating Officer. Though the investigation was originally conducted by the Sub Inspector of Police, subsequently Circle Inspector of Police, Kanjar took over the investigation and he has also questioned all the witnesses who were earlier questioned by the Sub Inspector of Police. Going through the case diary, I find no reason to direct a further investigation of the case as sought for. 4 6. Petition is dismissed. Petitioner is at liberty to file a private complaint if he is so advised. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE cms