IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY THURSDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1932 WA.No. 1925 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN RP.743/2010 Dated 28/09/2010 AND WPC .................... APPELLANT(S): REV.PETITIONER/6TH RESPONDENT IN WPC -------------------------------------------------- T.K.G.PANICKER, S/O.KOCHUPILLA PANICKER, AGED 59 YEARS, MITTUKOTTAGE, AKAMKUDIMURI, NANGIARKULANGARA PO, HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/PETITIONERS IN WPC & RES 1 TO 5 AND 7. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. N.VENUKUMAR, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, AGED 44 YEARS, RESIDING AT ASHTALEKSHMI, NANGIARKULANGARA PO,HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-688 001. 2. M.VENU, S/O.MADHAVAN, AGED 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, NANGIARKULANGARA MURI, PALLIPPAD VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE DGP,.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1 5. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA PIN-688 001. 6. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-688 001. 7. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-688 001. 2 8. M.SURESH, S/O.MADHAVAN PILLAI, AGED 45 YEARS, ERICKAL KALEEYICKAL, PALLIPAD VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK, NANGIARKULANGARA PO, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,PIN-688 001. ADV. SRI.SAJITH KUMAR V. FOR R1 &2 R3 TO R7 BY G.P. SMT. MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W.A. No. 1925 of 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge directing crime branch investigation against the appellant in a case of forgery. Writ Appeal is filed stating that learned single Judge did not give sufficient opportunity to the appellant to oppose the Writ Petition seeking direction for investigation by crime branch. However, we notice that this is the second round Writ Appeal and even though in the first round litigation, Division Bench remanded the matter on appellant's appeal against similar judgment, appellant did not choose to file counter affidavit or raise objections before the learned single Judge. In fact, after the disposal of the Writ Petition by the learned single Judge, again taking the same stand, appellant filed a Review Petition in which counter affidavit was filed. It is seen that learned single Judge has gone through the counter affidavit and found no merit in the appellant's contention. The allegation of the party-respondent is WA 1925/2010 2 that appellant is very rich, influential and capable of influencing political leaders and police and so much so, investigation by crime branch only can lead to proper prosecution and trial. If the appellant is not involved, we do not know why he should worry as to which agency investigating the case. We do not find any justification to entertain the challenge against the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge because crime branch investigation is ordered only for proper enquiry. Counsel for the appellant submitted that crime branch is harassing the family members of the appellant. We do not think crime branch can harass family members for the crime committed by the appellant. We leave it to the appellant to bring to the notice of the concerned authority, including court, if there is harassment in the course of investigation. Subject to the above, Writ Appeal is dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (BHABANI PRASAD RAY) Judge. kk WA 1925/2010 3