IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 22ND MAGHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 516 of 2008() ------------------------ CRIME NO.1 OF 2008 CHITTAR EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------------------------ RAMANAN, S/O.JANARDHANAN, OLICKAL VEEDU KADUMEEN CHIRA, ATHIKKAYAM VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER EXCISE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASST.EXCISE COMMISSIONER, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, CHITTAR RANGE PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 4. O.PRASAD, THE EXCISE INSPECTOR CHITTAR RANGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 5. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.516 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11th day of February, 2008 ORDER The petitioner seeks a direction to the 2nd respondent - the Assistant Excise Commissioner, Pathanamthitta to conduct further investigation in Crime No.1/2008 of Chittar Excise Range registered for an offence punishable under Section 8(2) of the Kerala Abkari Act, allegedly carrying 9.50 litres of illicit arrack on 03.01.08 at 5.30p.m. According to the petitioner, the detection as well as the investigation by the 4th respondent is an abuse of his official power and authority and made with a view to wreck personal vengeance against the petitioner. According to the petitioner he has been falsely implicated by the 4th respondent. 2. It is too early to hold that the investigation by the 4th respondent is biased or that he has misused his authority to wreck personal vengeance against the petitioner. Even assuming Section 173(8) Cr.P.C enabling further investigation by the Excise Officials is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case, the said power can be exercised only when a final Crl.M.C.No.516 of 2008 2 report has been filed before the court. Admittedly final report has not been filed so far, before the court. Even before the filing of the charge sheet the petitioner cannot seek a direction for further investigation by superior officers. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioner, if any, to seek appropriate directions in case he is charge sheeted in the above case, this Crl.M.C is dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj