Petitioner seeks direction under Section 482 CrPC for proper investigation. Court directs the Superintendent of Police to dispose of the petitioner's representation within two weeks. Case disposed of with this directive.
Directed the second respondent to dispose of Annexure A1 representation within two weeks from the date of receipt.
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. P.S.GOPINATHAN
MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL 2012/13TH CHAITHRA 1934
Crl.MC.No. 519 of 2012 ()
CRIME NO.1753/2011 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION
PETITIONER/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
VALSALA KUNJUMON
D/O. DEVAKI, AGED 42 YEARS, MANALIL HOUSE THANGATTU SETTLEMENT COLONY, MEPRAL, PERINGARA THIRUVALLA.
BY ADVS.SRI.SAJITH KUMAR V. SRI.K.RANA DEEP
COMPLAINANT(S):
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-04-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
P.S.GOPINATHAN, J.
Crl.M.C.No.519 of 2012
Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2012
ORDER
In this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the defacto complainant, seeks an order directing the second respondent to take action against the 4th respondent and to conduct a proper investigation in Crime No.1753 of 2011 of Thiruvalla Police Station. The plea of the petitioner is that the statement of the petitioner was not recorded by the investigating officer as stated by her. But something else was recorded by the 4th respondent and the case was registered and that no proper investigation is conducted. It is seen that regarding the same issue the petitioner has filed Annexure A1 representation before the second respondent and on that representation no action is taken so far. In the above circumstance, I find that the grievance of the petitioner could be redressed by directing the second respondent to dispose of Annexure A1 representation within a time frame.
In the result, this petition is disposed of directing the second
Crl.M.C.No.519 of 2012 2
respondent to dispose of Annexure A1 representation as early as possible, at any rate within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order which the petitioner shall produce before the second respondent. In the event the petitioner is aggrieved by such order, the petitioner is at liberty to assail the same in appropriate forum.
P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE
cms
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the grievance of the petitioner regarding improper investigation can be redressed by directing the second respondent to dispose of Annexure A1 representation within a specific timeframe.
Whether the petition is maintainable under Section 482 CrPC to direct police action against a respondent.
How to address the petitioner's complaint that her statement was not recorded properly and no proper investigation was conducted.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Valsala Kunjumon
State of Kerala
Superintendent of Police, Pathanamthitta
Circle Inspector of Police, Thiruvalla
S.I of Police, Thiruvalla
P.S. Gopinathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
