NEELA LOHITHA DASAN NADAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA
LAWS(KER)-2003-2-58
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on February 24,2003

NEELA LOHITHA DASAN NADAR Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Revision petitioner is the sole accused in C.C. 2/2001 on the file of the court of Judicial Magistrate of the First Class III, Trivandrum. Commission of offence punishable under S.354 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged against the petitioner. Date of occurrence is 21.12.1999. FIR was registered on 20.2.2000 as Crime No 47/2000 of Museum Police Station and subsequently renumbered as Crime No, 40 / CR / 2000 by the Crime Branch CIT), Investigation, Trivandrum.
(2.) Ori 25.2.2000 accused filed a Writ Petition under Art.226 of the Constitution ' before this Court as O.P. No. 6210/00 In which the State of Kerala was respondent No.1 and the Director General of Police was respondent No. 2. Respondents 3 to 5 were the S.H.O., Museum Police Station, the de facto complainant and the husband of the defacto complainant respectively. The main prayer in the above O.P. was to quash Crime No. 47/2000 of the Museum Police Station.
(3.) A Division Bench of this Court disposed of the O.P. by judgment dated 8.3.2000. Para.2 of the above judgment reads as follows: "It is brought to our notice that the investigation is being presently done by the Additional Director General of Police, Crimes and able investigators including one Deputy Inspector General of Police are there to assist him. It is stated that though at some stages there were some variations, that has now been taken care of and the investigation shall be done by the Additional Director General of Police himself, assisted by a team as aforesaid. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused feels that certain materials need to be looked into by the investigating agency for the purpose of finding out whether any offence has been really committed as alleged. It is not in dispute that the purpose of investigation is not only to find out materials to make accusations of commission of offence and if in fact there is no material, the investigating agency can fairly report that no offence is made out. That being the position, if the accused furnishes list of materials, which need to be looked into by the investigating officer and / or a list of persons, who need to be examined for the purpose of investigation, the investigating officer would do well to take note of that and take action as is provided in law. Learned Advocate General has no objection if such a course is adopted. So far as the continuance of the Commission is concerned, it is for the Commission to decide whether continuance would be desirable in view of any circumstance which may come to its notice. The. Original Petition is accordingly closed.";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.