IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2011 / 17TH ASHADHA 1933 OP(C).No. 2165 of 2011(O) ------------------------- OS.370/2006 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT-I,MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER --------------- MINI, D/O.RAJAMMA, MULLASSERIL VEEDU, CHINGOLI MURI, CHINGOLI VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.K.KARTHIKEYA PANICKER SMT.DAYA K. PANICKER RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAREELAKULANGARA POLICE STATION, KAREELAKULANGARA, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA-690 572. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.K.SAJEEV THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs O.P.(C). NO. 2165/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28/03/2011 IN WPC.NO.9078/2011. P2: COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 18/04/2011. P3: COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 26/04/2011. P4: COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 19/04/2011 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).No.2165 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 08th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner filed a complaint in the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Haripad for offences punishable under Secs.120b, 465, 471 and 420 r/w Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case concerned alleged forgery of a Will as if it is executed by the late husband of petitioner. Learned Magistrate forwarded the complaint to the respondent for investigation under Sec.156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, "the Code”). Thereafter, petitioner approached this Court with W.P.(C).No.9078 of 2011 for a direction for proper investigation of the case. That writ petition was disposed of as per Ext.P1, judgment dated March 28, 2011 making it clear that it is open to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate to call for report in the matter of investigation,. According to the petitioner, respondent submitted Ext.P3, report before learned Magistrate reporting the stage of investigation. He stated in that report that documents which are now in the custody of the Civil Court are required for further investigation, for getting those documents he has already made a request before learned O.P(C)..No.2165 of 2011 -: 2 :- Additional District Judge-I, Mavelikkara and that on receipt of records investigation will be continued. It is seen from Ext.P4, report that respondent submitted an application before learned Additional District Judge, Mavelikkara requesting to release the documents referred therein for investigation of Crime No.367 of 2010 (referred above). Grievance of petitioner is that in spite of that report the document has not been released to the respondent and investigation is held up. It is therefore requested in this proceeding that a direction may be issued to the learned Additional District Judge-I, Mavelikkara to forward the Will produced in O.S.No.370 of 2006 of the court of learned Munsiff, Kayamkulam and now retained in the custody of learned Additional District Judge in A.S.Nos.17 and 18 of 2010 to the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Haripad to facilitate its release to the officer investigating the case. Learned counsel has invited my attention to the decision in Selva Raj Vs. Sarakunju Vilson and Anr. (2010(3) KLT 124) where, with respect to the documents which was in the custody of the Civil Court, this Court held that in view of Sec.91 of the Code, it is within the power of the officer in charge of Police Station investigating the case to make written request to the O.P(C)..No.2165 of 2011 -: 3 :- Court to get custody of document in question and if the Court is satisfied about its need, it is open to such Court to grant custody of document and pass appropriate orders. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also. 2. Under Rule 131 of the Civil Rules of Practice, request for release of the document has to be made to the Court in which such documents are originally filed and if any document has been transmitted to any other Court, the former Court shall request such Court to retransmit the document and on receipt of the same, shall return it to the applicant. In the light of the decision referred supra appropriate course open to the respondent is to move an application like Ext.P4, before learned Munsiff, Kayamkulam in O.S.No.370 of 2006. It is for the learned Munsiff to request learned Additional District Judge-I, Mavelikkara to retransmit relevant document to the trial court. Learned Munsiff has to consider the request of the Investigating Officer having regard to all relevant aspects including the need to have the original document for investigation and if he is satisfied after hearing all parties concerned that the document has to be given to the police officer for the purpose of investigation, he may pass appropriate orders after taking appropriate precautionary steps O.P(C)..No.2165 of 2011 -: 4 :- such as retaining certified photocopy of the document in question and directing the police officer to re-present the document in the same Court after the purpose of investigation is over and such other directions as are required. I make it clear that I have not expressed any opinion whether the document is to be released to the officer concerned or not and that the said matter is to be decided by the learned Munsiff in the circumstances stated above. Resultantly this petition is disposed of making it clear that the respondent, S.I of police, Kareelakulangara can move appropriate application as aforesaid before learned Munsiff, Kayamkulam and on such application being filed, learned Munsiff shall proceed in the matter as provided under law and pass appropriate orders. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-