IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2008 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4069 of 2008() -------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.286/2008 OF KODAKARA POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 2: -------------------------------------------- SUNIL, S/O. KOCHURAMAN,NJARAKKADAN HOUSE ANATTHADOM DESOM, KODAKARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KODAKARA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTEND, CRIME BRANCH OF POLICE,THRISSUR REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2008 ALONG WITH CRL.M.C.NO.4080 OF 2008 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. Nos.4069, 4080, 4081, 4082, 4083, 4085 & 4086 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of October, 2008 ORDER The common petitioner in these 7 Crl.M.Cs. has come to this Court with a prayer that the 7 crimes registered at the Kodakara Police Station i.e., Crime Nos.285/08 to 291/08 – all, inter alia, under Sec.379 IPC, may be quashed or in the alternative, the investigation of that crimes may be entrusted to some superior unbiased police official. 2. According to the petitioner, two Police Constables from the Kodakara Police Station in civil dress had come to the house of the petitioner's friend and had attempted to take away the petitioner who was present there. They wanted to interrogate the petitioner showing some address to him. People of the locality raised objections and thereupon, the police officials in civil dress returned. In fact, the petitioner Crl.M.C. Nos.4069, 4080, 4081, 4082, 4083, 4085 & 4086 of 2008 -: 2 :- and others of the locality did not then know that these persons were the police officials of the Kodakara Police Station. They went to the Police Station to make complaints and it was then that they realised that these two persons were the police officials of that Police Station. The police officials had allegedly taken away an amount of Rs.4,500/- from the petitioner when he was met by them on the first occasion. Though complaint about that was made, no action has been taken by the police. 3. On 23/9/08, the police have made records to make it appear that the 1st accused was arrested and he on interrogation revealed the complicity of himself and the petitioner herein in 7 crimes which all do relate to theft of L.P.G. cylinders. On the basis of such statement of the co-accused, recovery of 7 gas cylinders has allegedly been made by now by the police. The petitioner has been arrayed as an accused. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 4. The petitioner has a case that the allegations are totally false. According to him, he has nothing to do with the co- accused. The co-accused had never revealed the name of the petitioner. Because of animosity arising out of the complaints made by the petitioner regarding the incident which took place Crl.M.C. Nos.4069, 4080, 4081, 4082, 4083, 4085 & 4086 of 2008 -: 3 :- on 19/9/08, the petitioner has been falsely implicated as the 2nd accused in these 7 crimes. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the powers under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked to quash the 7 crimes registered against the petitioner or, at least, there may be a direction to entrust the investigation to more competent and unbiased hands. 5. Powers under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. by its very nature is sweeping and wide. Such powers can extend to the quashing of an FIR and also clothe the court with powers to issue directions to ensure a proper investigation. The very width, sweep and amplitude of the powers must bring with it the need for caution and restraint in the invocation of such powers. Merely because the court has jurisdictional competence to invoke such powers, such powers cannot be invoked. Satisfactory, compelling and exceptional reasons must be shown to exist to justify the invocation of such powers. 6. I shall carefully avoid any detailed discussions on the acceptability of the allegations against the petitioner or the credibility of the data collected against him. Suffice it to say that it now appears that a co-accused has been arrested and on his statement the complicity of the petitioner in the 7 crimes in Crl.M.C. Nos.4069, 4080, 4081, 4082, 4083, 4085 & 4086 of 2008 -: 4 :- question has been indicated. Police are conducting an investigation into those crimes. At the present moment and with the available inputs, I am not persuaded to agree that there is any reason to justify or warrant the invocation of the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction. It will not be inapposite to note that no prior animosity is suggested against any police officers before the first contact was made with the petitioner by the two officials of the local Police Station enquiring about the details of a person whose address was shown to the petitioner. 7. The police deserve to be granted time to investigate the crime. At the present stage and with the available inputs, I am not persuaded to agree that there is any necessity or justification to invoke the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. The petitioner, if he is so advised, must apply for anticipatory bail. In the alternative, he can surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. Needless to say, such application for regular bail will have to be considered by the learned Magistrate in accordance with law. I am not persuaded to agree that any further or specific directions need be issued in the matter. There is absolutely no justifiable reason at this stage to direct Crl.M.C. Nos.4069, 4080, 4081, 4082, 4083, 4085 & 4086 of 2008 -: 5 :- the investigation to be handed over to any other person. 8. These Crl.M.Cs. are, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above observations. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge