IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4352 of 2008 ---------------------------------- (CRIME NO. 406/2000 OF ATTINGAL POLICE STATION) .......... PETITIONER/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------------- SUKUMARY AMMA,D/O. BHAVANI AMMA AGED 61, PRASANNALAYAM, ELAMBA PO, AVANAVANCHERRY VIA, ATTINGAL. BY ADV. SRI.VAZHUTHACAUD R.NARENDRAN NAIR. RESPONDENTS/ STATE & ACCUSED 1 & 2: ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. K.S.RAMESH BABU, S/O.KARUNAKARAN NAIR, LEKSHMI SANKAR NIVAS, THIRUVALLOOR, ANDOORKONAM KEEZAVOOR ,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. REMA DEVI, D/O. SARASAMMA, RESIDING AT DO...DO.... R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4352 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of November 2008 O R D E R The petitioner has an unfortunate tale to narrate. Her daughter was married to a person who was employed in the forces. There was some strain in the relationship between the spouses and the wife, that is the petitioner's daughter, was left at home. There were attempts to settle the disputes between them. The superior officer of the son-in-law in the forces had allegedly assured that the daughter of the petitioner shall not be obliged to suffer any indignity. Accordingly, the spouses had resumed co-habitation. She was residing at Ludhiana with her husband. She met with her death when she was residing with her husband at Ludhiana. While the husband explained that it was a case of simple suicide, the petitioner apprehended that there was some foul play involved. She came to this court. As per the directions of this court, a crime was registered. Investigation was conducted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police. There was change in incumbents occupying the chair. Investigation was ultimately concluded and a report was filed to the court that no Crl.M.C.No.4352/08 2 crime has been committed in respect of the death of the petitioner's daughter and that it was a case of suicide. That final report is annexed with this petition as Annexure I dated 28/09/2005. 2. Dissatisfied with the said report, it appears that the petitioner filed a private complaint (a copy of which is produced as Annexure II). That petition happened to be dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. The petitioner came to this court to assail that order. Annexure III order was passed by another Bench of this court on 08/08/2007 and the said Crl.R.P.No.2679/07 was allowed. The petitioner was granted further opportunity to substantiate her case. 3. When the matter reached the learned Magistrate, the petitioner, it appears, represented and filed a memo stating that she does not intend to proceed with the case. Accordingly, Annexure V order was passed on 19/07/2003. It appeared that there was a decent burial of the entire controversy with Annexure V. But now the petitioner has come to this court again and submits that a further investigation ought to be conducted into the crime registered under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. Crl.M.C.No.4352/08 3 4. I have narrated the sequence of events. The petitioner admittedly has not moved the learned Magistrate under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C or under Section 156 Cr.P.C to direct a further investigation to be conducted. I need only mention that in the facts and circumstances of this case I am not at all persuaded to invoke the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction to issue any further directions in the matter. 5. This Crl.M.C is accordingly dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.4352/08 4 Crl.M.C.No.4352/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008