IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2009 / 30TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 27454 of 2009(Q) -------------------------- CMP.5029/2008 of ADDL.C.J.M.(E&O),ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- R.K. USMAN, S/O. ABDU, RARAM KANDATH HOUSE, THRIKKNAPURAM, (VIA) THAVANNOOR, MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.ABOOBACKER(EDAPPALLY) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CI.I. OF POLICE, C.B.C.I.D, NOORIYAD, CHALAPPURAM, KOZHIKODE,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE ASST; DIRECTOR, DEPT. OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R2 R1 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.C.NO.27454 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 22nd October 2009 JUDGMENT This petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus directing first respondent, Circle Inspector of Police, C.B.C.I.D not to arrest the petitioner for the very same offence, investigated by second respondent in D.R.I crime No.4/2008 and to direct the first respondent to call the petitioner to the police station for investigation only on summons and for permission to accompany a counsel with the petitioner at the time of questioning. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader were heard. 3. Learned counsel submitted that by Ext.P1 order petitioner was granted bail by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Ernakulam in D.R.I Crime No.4/2008 and while granting bail, it is found that the part played by the petitioner is lesser compared to the other accused and in such circumstances, petitioner cannot be arrested for the Wpc 27454/09 2 very same offence. 4. Learned Government Pleader pointed out that in D.R.I crime No.4/2008 customs officials are not investigating the offence under Section 489 B, 489 C and 120 B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and it is being investigated by first respondent and hence petitioner is not entitled to get an order interfering with the investigation. 5. The offence under Section 489 B and 489 C of Indian Penal Code was not investigated by the second respondent in D.R.I.4/2008. Second respondent is investigating only the offence under the Customs Act. The offence under Indian Penal Code is being investigated by the first respondent in crime No.103/2009. Petitioner is not entitled to get an order that he shall not be arrested in crime No.103/2009, which now stands re- numbered as crime 22/CR/SIG 3/09. First respondent is entitled to investigate the case and for investigation, if custodial interrogation is necessary, first respondent could be arrested and questioned. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.