IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2008 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 16034 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SUBIN ROY, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.REV.FR.ROY PAUL, VETTIKKATTIL HOUSE, KULAYATTIKARA, KANJIRAMATTOM - 682 308. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SABU RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBCID, THRISSUR. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, LAW & ORDER, THRISSUR. 3. DGP OF POLICE, LAW & ORDER, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUPUZHA POLICE STATION. 5. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.C.No. 16034 of 2008 H - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of May, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the defacto complainant/victim in a crime registered as Crime No.180 of 2008 of Nedupuzha police station of Trichur Dist. Crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. 2. According to the petitioner no proper investigation is being conducted. He has suffered serious injuries, but even proper sections of offence have not been included. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has come before this Court with this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue appropriate directions to the Investigating Officer or to issue appropriate directions for entrustment of the investigation to other competent agencies. 3. After the decision in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. (2008 (1) KLT 746) it is for the petitioner to approach the W.P.C.No. 16034 of 2008 2 learned Magistrate and make his grievance about the inadequacy in investigation, if any. The said decision makes it clear that persons with grievances like that of the petitioner herein cannot, in the absence of compelling and exceptional reasons, rush to this Court with applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Article 226 of the Constitution. It was held unambiguously that powers under Section 157(3) Cr.P.C. are available with the Magistrate to supervise, monitor and interfere with the investigation in appropriate cases. It is also held clearly that without and before exhausting such remedy available under law, the petitioner cannot rush to this Court with this application under Article 226 of the Constitution. 4. Why has the petitioner not approached the learned Magistrate? Why has the petitioner chosen to rush to this Court directly with this petition? No satisfactory answers are forthcoming. The conclusion appears to be inevitable that the petitioner must appear before the learned Magistrate and seek appropriate orders. Needless to say, if such directions are sought, the learned Magistrate shall pass W.P.C.No. 16034 of 2008 3 appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with the dictum in Sakiri Vasu (supra). 5. This Writ Petition is dismissed with the above observation. (R. BASANT) Judge tm