K.P Sreekandan v. District Police Chief
Case brief
What is this about?
This judgment clarifies that writ petitions under Article 226 seeking orders on crime registration and investigation are not appropriate. The court directs the petitioner to seek reliefs from the competent authority by moving the learned Magistrate under Section 190 read with Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
What did the court decide?
Directed the petitioner to move the learned Magistrate and seek appropriate reliefs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JULY 2016/23RD ASHADHA, 1938
WP(C).No. 20072 of 2016 (H)
PETITIONER(S):
K.P. SREEKANDAN, S/O LATE KUNJAMBU, KUNJIPURAYI VEEDU, KALEESHWARAM P.O., KANKOL, KANNUR - 670 307.
BY ADV. SRI.V.R.REKESH
RESPONDENT(S):
1. DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, KANNUR - 670 001.
2. C.I. OF POLICE, THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR - 670 010.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SAREENA GEORGE
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to police authorities to conduct enquiries and register cases under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
What is the appropriate alternative remedy for the aggrieved party when no cognizable offence is made out.
Whether the petitioner should move the learned Magistrate under Sections 190 and 200 of CrPC instead of approaching the High Court.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K.P. SREEKANDAN
- respondent
DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, KANNUR
- respondent
C.I. OF POLICE, THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court