Remanded

P.Narayanan & Another v. State of Kerala & Others

Kerala HC11 Jul 2011RP/421/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Seeking further investigation into an investigation under the Immoral Traffic Act where the final report's filing date was incorrect. The court directed a supplementary FIR and investigation.

What did the court decide?

Directed Assistant Commissioner of Police, Thrikkakkara, to conduct further investigation under Sec. 173(8) Cr.P.C. and file supplementary final report within three months.

P.Narayanan & Another Vs State of Kerala & Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2011 / 20TH ASHADHA 1933

¶5

RP.No. 421 of 2011(Q)

¶6

--------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.15423/2010 Dated 11/06/2010

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER(S):

¶8

¶9

P.NARAYANAN, AGED 58 YEARS, (EX-MLA)LAKSHINARAYANIYIL HOUSE, NADUVILA VILLAGE,VAIKOM

¶10

ANIL KUMAR, AGED 34 S/O.P.NARAYANAN,LAKSHMINARAYANIYIL HOUSE, VAIKOM, NOW RESIDING AT THEVARA, MATTUMMEL SUDHARMA ROAD, MOOLAMANIL WEST, HIGHER FLAT NO. 3 APARTMENT

¶11

BY ADV. DR.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.M.CHANDRA BOSE

SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN

RESPONDENT(S):

STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶16

RP.No. 421 of 2011(Q)

¶17

-:2:-

¶18

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THRIKKAKARA,

¶19

THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HILL PALACE, THRIPUNITHURA

¶20

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE E.T.SOUTH POILCE STATION, ERNAKULAM

¶21

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.S. HRITHWIK

¶22

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

RP.No. 421 of 2011(Q)

¶24

-:3:-

¶25

APPENDIX

¶26

Annexure A1: True copy of the newspaper report appeared in Mangalam Newspaper on 24-1-200

¶27

Annexure A2: True copy of the newspaper report appeared in Mathrubhoomy newspaper on 3-2-2008

¶28

Annexure A3 : True copy of the letter dated 20-2-2008 written by the then President of TDB

¶29

Annexure A4: True copy of the minutes of the TDB meeting dated 217-2008

¶30

Annexure-A5: True copy of the newspaper report appeared in the Mangalam dated 1-2-2008

¶31

Annexure A5 (a) - True copy of the newspaper report appeared in the Malayala Manorama dated 17-1-2008

¶32

Annexure A5 (b): True copy of the news item apapeared in Kerala Kaumudi Newspaper on 17-1-2008

¶33

Annexure A6: True copy of the birth certificate dated 15-5-2010

¶34

Annexure- A7: True copy of the reply letter dated 3-10-2010

¶35

Annexure A8: True copy of the reply letter dated 15-12-2010

¶36

Annexure A9: True copy of the reply dated 5-8-2010

¶37

Annexure A10: True copy of the reply dated 5-8-2010

¶38

Annexure A11: True copy of the reply dated 7-10-2010

¶39

Annexure A12: True copy of the certificate dated 17-3-2010.

¶40

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶41

........................................................ Review Petition No. 421 of 2011

¶42

¶43

W.P. (C ) No. 15423 of 2010

¶44

Dated: 11-07-2011

¶45

ORDER

¶46

The review petitioners are the petitioners in the above Writ Petition which was filed with a prayer for entrusting the investigation of Crime No. 432 of 2010 of Ernakulam Town South Police Station with a responsible police officer of superior grade.

¶47

The petitioners are a father and son of whom the son is the first accused and his wife is the 2nd accused in the above crime registered for offences punishable under Sections 3 to 5 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

¶48

On 11-6-2010 when the Writ Petition came up for final hearing, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the final report had already been filed on 30-04-2010 before

¶49

Review Petition No. 421 of 2011 in W.P. (C ) No. 15423 of 2010 -:2:-

¶50

the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Ernakulam . In view of the above submission, this Court disposed of the Writ Petition permitting the petitioners to move the trial Court for appropriate orders in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. - 2008 (1) KLT 724 (SC).

¶51

It is the case of the petitioners that the submission

¶52

made before this Court was a wrong submission since the final report had not been filed as on 11-6-2010. The petitioners claim to have obtained the correct information under the Right to Information Act to the effect that even though the investigation was completed on 30-04-2010, the charge sheet was actually filed only on 27-7-2010. The above information is revealed by Annexure A11 reply obtained from

¶53

the Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act. The above information obtained by the petitioners is correct in the light of the letter dated 27-06-2011 received from the

¶54

Review Petition No. 421 of 2011 in W.P. (C ) No. 15423 of 2010 -:3:-

¶55

Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (E.O.), Ernakulam.

¶56

I am given to understand that the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate has already taken cognizance of the offences and has taken the case on file as C.C. 1519 of 2010.

¶57

The learned Government Pleader submitted that the submission made by him while disposing of the Writ Petition was in tune with the instructions given to him by the Investigating Officer. He also produced for perusal by this Court the said written instructions which he had obtained from the Investigating Officer. Whether the instructions given to the Government Pleader was intentional or unintentional, the fact remains that acting on the said information this Court disposed of the Writ Petition on the footing that the case was no more in the crime stage. But, as a matter of

¶58

fact on 11-6-2010 when this Court disposed of the Writ Petition, the case was still in the crime stage . This Court also cannot ignore the supervening fact that pursuant to the

¶59

Review Petition No. 421 of 2011 in W.P. (C ) No. 15423 of 2010

¶60

-:4:-

¶61

filing of the final report, cognizance of the offence has already been taken by the Magistrate. The circumstances highlighted by the petitioners and the social standing of the Ist petitioner persuade this Court to think that the 2^nd petitioner and his wife could be the victims of false implication and a further investigation alone will probably bring to light the truth. Now, at this stage of the case, it will be unjust to drive the petitioners to the trial Court with a request for further investigation. I am, therefore, of the view that interests of justice will be adequately met by directing the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Thrikkakkara, Kochi to conduct further investigation of the case under Sec. 173 (8) Cr.P.C. and to file a supplementary final report in accordance with the further investigation so conducted. The Commissioner of Police, Kochi shall supervise the further investigation to be conducted by the Assistant Commissioner. The supplementary final report shall be filed before the Addl.

¶62

Review Petition No. 421 of 2011 in W.P. (C ) No. 15423 of 2010 -:5:-

¶63

Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Officences) Ernakulam within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The trial court shall not proceed with C.C. No. 1519 of 2010 till then. The judgment under review is set aside and the Review Petition is allowed. The Writ Petition is disposed of afresh as above.

¶64

Copies of this order shall be forwarded to the Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of Police, Kochi.

¶65

Dated this the 11^th day of July, 2011.

¶66

Sd/-V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.

ani/

/true copy/

P.S. to Judge

Review Petition No. 421 of 2011 in W.P. (C ) No. 15423 of 2010 -:6:-

¶71

Review Petition No. 421 of 2011 in W.P. (C ) No. 15423 of 2010 -:7:-

P.Narayanan & Another v. State of Kerala & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Narayanan & Another v. State of Kerala & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.D.Varadarajan Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Vs State of Kerala

Nimesh @ Ambili Vs State of Kerala

P.Narayanan Vs State of Kerala

Souda Vs v.Ajith

Roy John Vs S.I. of Police , Koodal and Another