The High Court of Kerala quashed a reinvestigation order issued by a senior police official without detecting new facts or evidence, holding it an abuse of the court's process under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The criminal miscellaneous case was allowed and the impugned order to reinvestigate was quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
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.SOMARAJAN
TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 21ST ASWINA, 1942
Crl.MC.No.6118 OF 2013
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS 121/2008 DATED 07-09-2011 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , PARAVOOR
CRIME NO.82/2007 OF Chathannoor Police Station , Kollam
PETITIONER/ACCUSED IN CRIME 82/2007 OF CHATHANOOR POLICE STATION BEFORE J.F.C.M. PARAVOOR:
SHAJAHAN M.J. S/O.LATE JAILANI, SUJAS MANZIL, THIRUVATHUKAL, KOTTAYAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY SRI.T.A.JOY SRI.NIXON PAUL
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS AND STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING S.I. OF POLICE, CHATHANOOR POLICE STATION.
2 JACOB VARGHESE S/O.VARGHESE, MUTHALALI, KOIPPURATHU, THAZHAM NORTH, CHATHANOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
R1 BY ADV. SRI. RAMESH CHAND R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJESH R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.BINNY JOSEPH R2 BY ADV. SHRI.BASIL MATHEW
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.6118 OF 2013
2
ORDER
A senior police official issued a direction to the Station House Officer to re-investigate a crime after the submission of a refer report under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. It was challenged by the defacto complainant by filing a protest complaint. It was proceeded with and at the time of framing of charge based on the protest complaint, it was found that there is no ground for proceeding further with the matter. It was thereafter, the senior officer of police ( an IPS officer) had issued a direction to the Station House Officer to re-investigate the crime presumably under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C., without detecting any new fact or evidence. It is really an abuse of the process of court. The same is quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Crl.M.C. is allowed accordingly.
P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE
SPV
Crl.MC.No.6118 OF 2013
3
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
| ANNEXURE I | TRUE PHOTO DATED 28.02 STATION BEF MAGISTRATE |
COPY OF THE F.I.R. 82/2007 .2007 OF CHATHANOOR POLICE ORE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS COURT, PARAVOOR. |
|---|---|---|
| ANNEXURE II | TRUE PHOTO CHATHANOOR J.F.M.C. PA |
COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET OF POLICE STATION BEFORE RAVOOR. |
| ANNEXURE III | TRUE PHOTO 12.02.2007 POLICE, CHA |
COPY OF THE PETITION DATED BEFORE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF THANOOR. |
| ANNEXURE IV | TRUE PHOTO 07.09.2011 ADDITIONAL |
COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED IN O.S.121/2008 OF SUB COURT, KOTTAYAM. |
| ANNEXURE V | TRUE PHOTO 5309 DATED PARAVOOR. |
COPY OF THE PETITION C.M.P. 18.07.2009 BEFORE J.F.M.C. |
| ANNEXURE VI | TRUE PHOTO 11.02.2010 PARAVOOR. |
COPY OF THE ORDER DATED IN C.M.P.5309 OF J.F.M.C. |
| ANNEXURE VII | TRUE PHOTO 12.01.2010 POLICE, KOL |
COPY OF THE ORDER DATED OF SUPERINTENDENT OF LAM. |
| ANNEXURE VIII | TRUE PHOTO 21.01.2010 CRIME 82/20 PARAVOOR. |
COPY OF THE REPORT DATED OF INVESTIGATING OFFICER IN 07 BEFORE J.F.M.C. |
| ANNEXURE IX | TRUE COPY O 01.10.2012 JFMC, PARAV |
F THE REPORT DATED IN CRIME 82/2007 BEFORE OOR. |
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a direction to reinvestigate under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. without detecting new facts or evidence constitutes an abuse of the process of court.
Whether such improper reinvestigation order is maintainable under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
SHAJAHAN M.J.
STATE OF KERALA
JACOB VARGHESE
P.SOMARAJAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
