IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 15TH MAGHA 1931 WA.No. 166 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.25545/2009 Dated 11/01/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- V.M.RAJALAKSHMI, PROPRIETOR, KAIRALI GAS AGENCY, ULLIYERI, RARAM PARAMBATH HOUSE, NAGATHINKAL PARAMBA, GOVT.ARTS COLLEGE P.O. KOZHIKODE, KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL) KOZHIKODE DIST. 2.DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE DIST. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ATHOLI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DIST. 4.SALEENA, W/O.MUHAMMED ALI, PUTHALATH VEEDU, KINALOOR P.O., VIA., BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE DIST. 5.MUHAMMED ALI, S/O.ABOOBACKER, PUTHALATH VEEDU, KINALOOR P.O., VIA. BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE DIST. 6. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (HOME DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.166 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 4th February, 2010. J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant is the writ petitioner. She is a member of a Scheduled Caste. A crime was registered, based on the information lodged by her against one Mr.Muhammed Ali and his wife Saleena by the second respondent as per Ext.P3 First Information Report, for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506, read with Section 34 I.P.C. and also under Section 3 (1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The police completed the investigation and filed the final report before the Magistrate concerned. Now, the matter has been committed to the Sessions Court, Kozhikode and the case is pending trial as S.C.No.1396/06. The writ petition was filed by the appellant/petitioner, seeking a direction to the Superintendent of Police(Rural), Kozhikode to take action on Ext.P4 complaint filed by her. In Ext.P4, she has raised complaints about the incorrect statements in Ext.P3, which are attributed to her. She also prayed for taking action on Ext.P8 recommendation WA NO.166/10 2 made by the Kerala State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. As per Ext.P8, the Commission has forwarded to the 2nd respondent, a complaint dated 7.2.2009 filed by the appellant. But, the learned Single Judge, after noticing the contentions of the respondents, dismissed the writ petition. Hence, this Writ Appeal. 2. We notice that the grievance of the appellant is concerning the investigation of a crime. Now, the S.C.No.1396/06, based on that crime is being tried by the Sessions Court, Kozhikode. After three years of filing the final report, the writ petition was filed. The learned Single Judge took the view that, if the petitioner has any grievance, her remedy lies before the criminal court. In that view of the matter, the writ petition was dismissed. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant. Having regard to the aforementioned facts, we feel that the appellant has to work out her remedies, under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This Court cannot, at this stage, issue a writ of mandamus, as sought by the appellant, to look into Exts.P4 or P8. In the result, the Writ Appeal is dismissed, without WA NO.166/10 3 prejudice to the appellant's right to seek reliefs under the Code of Criminal Procedure. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. tgs K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.166 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 4th February, 2010.