In a contempt proceeding, the petitioner alleged the CBI's delay and indifferent attitude after a previous order entrusting her husband's death investigation to the agency. The court held that procedural delays were excusable as no time limit was fixed earlier and ordered the closure of the contempt case.
The contempt case is accordingly closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND APRIL 2008 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1930
Con.Case(C).No. 395 of 2008(S)
-----------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.36397/2007 Dated 23/01/2008
PETITIONER
MAGGIE VIJU. VALLAKALIL HOUSE MELPADAM, MANNAR, NOW RESIDING AT 'BETHANIYA' NEAR Y.M.C.A.OVER BRIDGE,THIRUVALLA.
BY ADV. SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL
RESPONDENT:
VIJAY SHANKER,DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION NORTH BLOCK,NEW DELHI.
BY ADV. SRI.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRY,SC, C.B.I.
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING
:
V. RAMKUMAR , J.
========================== Contempt Case (Civil) No.395 of 2008
==========================
Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2008.
ORDER
The petitioner who is the widow of one Viju Koshy moved this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 36397 of 2007 for entrusting the investigation into the circumstances leading to the mysterious disappearance and death of her husband to the Central Bureau of Investigation. After hearing all concerned, this Court as per judgment dated 23.01.2008 entrusted the investigation of the case with the CBI. The grievance of the petitioner is that no further investigation has been conducted by the CBI in spite of receipt of the judgment and the CBI has been taking an indifferent attitude with regard to the matter and further delay can only help in destroying the evidence which might be forthcoming.
COC NO. 395/2008 : 2:
English, the New Delhi unit of the CBI has registered the case on 27.03.2008 as RC.1(S)/2008/SCU.V/SCR.II/CBI/New Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 120 B, 364, 302 and 201 IPC. Having regard to the procedural formalities which are to be followed by the CBI, I do not think that there is unpardonable delay on the part of the CBI in registering the crime and commencing the investigation particularly when no time limit had been fixed by this Court in the judgment which is alleged to have been disobeyed. I am sure that the officer of this premier investigating agency in charge of the investigation will swing into action without any further delay and do the needful to bring to justice the culprits behind the mysterious death of the petitioner's husband.
This COC is accordingly closed.
V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.
rv
COC NO. 395/2008 : 3:
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay by the CBI in registering the case despite the previous court order constitutes contempt of court.
Whether the grievance of the petitioner regarding indifferent attitude of the CBI is admissible in this contempt proceeding.
Maggie ViJu
Vijay Shanker
V. Ramkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
