IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 16389 of 2008(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JISSO C B, AGED 29/08 YEARS, S/O.CHIRAMMEL BABY, FINANCE MANAGER, CHEMMANNUR JEWELLERY, MAVOOR ROAD,KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME MINISTRY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, (KERALA ), TRIVANDRUM. POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, TRIVANDRUM. 4. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, CALICUT CITY, KOZHIKODE. 5. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE (NADAKKAVU POLICE STATION CRIME NO 213 OF 2008). 6. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CENRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (CBI), HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.AMJAD ALI ADV. SRI.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRY,SC, C.B.I. FOR R6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- W.P.C.No.16389 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of June 2008 J U D G M E N T Heard. The short grievance of the petitioner is that no proper investigation is being conducted into crime No.213/08 of Nadakkavu police station, Kozhikode registered under Section 420 I.P.C. It is prayed that appropriate directions may be issued to ensure the conduct of a fair and proper investigation by any other agency. 2. The application is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor reports that the crime was registered on 6/5/2008. Altogether there are four accused persons. Accused 1 and 2 were arrested promptly on 8/5/2008. The second accused has been granted bail on 22/5/2008. The first accused is continuing in custody even now. Accused 3 and 4 had approached this court and anticipatory bail was granted by this court to those petitioners. Twelve witnesses have already been questioned. The investigating officer is confident that he will be able to complete the investigation without delay and shall be in a position to bring the offenders to book. At this stage, it is not necessary to issue any directions W.P.C.No.16389/08 2 under Section 482 Cr.P.C or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor further points out that the petitioner is not justified in rushing to this court with this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without and before moving the learned Magistrate and seeking appropriate directions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. 3. The decision in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P & Others [2008 AIR SCW 309] is authority for the proposition that the learned Magistrate has a reservoir of powers reserved for him under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C to issue appropriate directions to ensure the conduct of a proper investigation. Without and before exhausting the said remedy available under law, the petitioner is not justified in rushing to this court with this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, urges the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor that in the light of the decision in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P & Others [2008 AIR SCW W.P.C.No.16389/08 3 309] which has been followed by this court in the decision in Vasanthi Devi v. Sub Inspector of Police [2008(1) KLT 945] the petitioner cannot rush to this court with a claim for relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without and before exhausting such efficacious alternative remedy available under law. I am unable to perceive any such compelling circumstances in this case which can oblige or prompt this court to deviate from the normal procedure and invoke the extraordinary constitutional powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. This writ petition is in these circumstances dismissed but with the specific observation that the dismissal of this writ petition will not in any way fetter the rights of the petitioner to move the learned Magistrate seeking appropriate directions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. If such petition is filed needless to say, appropriate orders must be passed by the learned Magistrate in the light of the decisions referred above. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.C.No.16389/08 4 W.P.C.No.16389/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007