Allowed

Chandrika Unnikrishnan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC27 Jun 2016WP(C)/13797/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petition sought a transfer of investigation into temple property misuse allegations from a local police officer to the State Cyber Cell. The court noted the accused's alleged conflict with the current officer. It directed the transfer of the investigation to the fifth respondent for expeditious handling.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 2nd respondent to hand over the investigation of Crime No. 865/14 to the 5th respondent to be conducted expeditiously.

Chandrika Unnikrishnan Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/6TH ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 13797 of 2016 (Y)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

CHANDRIKA UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 64 YEARS, W/O. UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, KIZHAMANA HOUSE, PUNNAPRA.P.O., ALAPUZHA-3. REPRESENTED BY THE POWER HOLDER UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O. APPUKUTTAN NAIR, KIZHAMANA HOUSE, PUNNAPRA.P.O., ALAPUZHA-3.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR SMT.V.SHYLAJA

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶11

2. THE STATE POLICE CHIEF, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶12

3. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPUZHA-688 001

¶13

4. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPUZHA-688 001

¶14

5. THE SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE, CBCID (STATS), THRISSUR-680 001

¶15

6. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

¶16

PUNNAPRA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 001

¶17

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. ABDUL SHUKOOR.M.A.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

sts

¶20

WP(C).NO.13797/2016

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS AND ANNEXURES:

¶23

P1 COPY OF THE FIR IN RESPECT OF CRIME NO.865/2014. P2 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE MINISTER AND HID ORDER P3 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION. P4 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT P5 COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER. P6 COPY OF THE MINUTES BOOK.

¶24

ANNEX A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY

¶25

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

sts

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J

¶30

----------------------------------------

¶31

W.P.(C) No.13797 of 2016

¶32

-----------------------------------------

¶33

Dated this the 27^th day of June, 2016

¶34

J U D G M E N T

¶35

1.This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶36

“(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby direct the 2^nd respondent to entrust the investigation of Ext.P1 crime with 5^th respondent or any officer subordinate to him in the same office, not below the rank of DYSP and with the day to day monitoring of the investigation by the 5^th respondent.”

¶37

2.Alleging misuse of landed property of a temple, the petitioner had filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ambalapuzha. The said complaint was referred to the police for investigation, based on which Ext.P1 crime was registered as Crime No.865 of 2014 for offence punishable under sections 452, 506 (ii), 406, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 472 and

¶38

W.P.(C) 13797/2016

¶39

¶40

120(b) r/w 34 of the IPC.

¶41

3.His grievance is that the investigation presently being

¶42

conducted by the 4^th respondent is tardy. It is also submitted that the accused have managed to win over the officer as they have worked in his office as contemporaries or subordinates. The learned Counsel submits that the investigation be handed over to another officer of proven integrity and track record.

¶43

4.The learned Public Prosecutor was directed to get instructions.

¶44

5.The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the State

¶45

has no objection in handing over the investigation to the fifth respondent, which officer heads the department trained in dealing with matters pertaining to misuse of temple properties.

¶46

6.Having regard to the said submission, this writ petition is disposed off directing the 2^nd respondent to hand

¶47

W.P.(C) 13797/2016

¶48

¶49

over investigation in Ext.P1 ( Crime No. 865/14 of

¶50

Punnapra Police Station) to the fifth respondent , who shall carry out the investigation and take it to its logical conclusion expeditiously.

¶51

The petition is disposed off.

¶52

Sd/RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE

¶53

vps

Chandrika Unnikrishnan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrika Unnikrishnan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh.K.R. Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Sufaid Vs State of Kerala

Mohandas v. Vs State of Kerala

Haneefa Vs State of Kerala

Sajesh N.V Vs State of Kerala