Kerala High Court
Saboora P.C vs State Of Kerala
Author: K.Ramakrishnan
Bench: K.Ramakrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/1ST PHALGUNA, 1935
WP(C).No. 31961 of 2013 (U)
----------------------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------------
SABOORA P.C,
PULIKKALCHELLANDYAKATHU, MADAYI AMSAM PUTHIYANGADI,
NEAR RATION SHOP, PUTHIYANGADI, KANNUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.M.PAREETH,
SMT.SONIA GEORGE.
RESPONDENTS:
-----------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
PAYANGADI POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 001.
2. DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE,
KANNUR-670 001.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE.P.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 20-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Prv.
W.P.(C).NO.31961/2013-U:
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBIT:
EXT.P.1: A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. NO.680/13 DATED 30/10/13 OF PAYANGADI
POLICE STATION.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE.
Prv.
K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
W.P.(C) No.31961 of 2013-U
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Dated this the 20th day of February, 2014
J U D G M E N T
This is an application filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to be given to the Investigating agency for speedy investigation or to entrust the investigation to a special team and in the alternative to Central Bureau of Investigation under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
2. It is alleged in the petition that she is a homemaker who approached the police subsequent to the incident having committed in her residence. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the police authorities have failed to act upon her First Information Statement. Though a crime was registered as Crime No.680/2013 of Pazhayangadi Police Station of Kannur District alleging offences under Sections 380, 457 and 461 of the Indian Penal Code, no proper investigation is being conducted. On 13.8.2013 when the petitioner was to leave for Gulf, her sister-in- W.P.(C) No.31961 of 2013-U 2 law and parents were present in the house to bid her farewell. Before leaving the house, she had locked her bed room and placed the keys in the cubboard kept in the adjacent room. The petitioner happened to see her neighbour Belkies keenly observing her while she was doing the aforesaid act. Thereafter, she left the house without informing the presence of the key in the cubboard. She returned to her native place on 29.10.2013. At that time when the house was opened she failed to see the key which she had kept safely. She was unable to open the bedroom and sought assistance from one carpenter Krishnan for this purpose. When she entered the house, she found that the cubboard in the room had been found broken and opened and cash and gold ornaments were missing. Whenever the petitioner's father had to travel in connection with his treatment, he would always entrust the house key, with his neighbour Belkies. The petitioner subsequently came to understand that some of her relatives have stayed in their house after the sad demise of her father. But the investigation W.P.(C) No.31961 of 2013-U 3 is not going in the proper direction. So she has no other remedy except to approach this Court seeking the following reliefs:
"A writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to entrust the investigation on Ext.P1 crime to a special investigation team and also to direct the time frame within which final report has to be filed.
ii) Alternatively to direct the 2nd respondent to entrust the investigation to Crime Branch so as to ensure speedy action.
iii) to grant such other reliefs this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case".
3. On the basis of the allegations in the petition a statement was called for from the Investigating Officer and 2nd respondent has filed a statement as follows:
"It is submitted that the above writ petition is filed praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to entrust the investigation in Crime No. 680/13 of Pazhayangadi police station to a special Investigation team and also to direct the Investigating W.P.(C) No.31961 of 2013-U 4 Officer to file final report within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court or in the alternative direct the 2nd respondent to entrust the investigation to Crime Branch, etc. It is respectfully submitted that the petitioner has no right to insist that a particular agency or officer of his choice to investigate the crime and therefore the prayer is not legally sustainable.
It is submitted that a crime as Crime No. 680/2013 u/s. 457, 380, 461 I.P.C. has been registered on 30.10.2013 at Pazhayangadi police station on the strength of a statement given by the petitioner herein. The brief of the case is that on 1.8.2013 at 30.30 hrs. and on 29.10.2013 at 12.13 hrs. some unidentified persons committed theft of 75 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs. 60,000/- by opened the house of the complainant, etc. On registration of the above crime these respondents has conducted the investigation and he prepared scene mahazar. The scene of W.P.(C) No.31961 of 2013-U 5 occurrence is a room in a house owned by one late Shri. C.H.Hameed which is situated in Ward. No. XV of Madayi Grama Panchayat. The scene of crime was examined by finger print expert and the service of dog squad was also utilized.
It is respectfully submitted during the course of investigation, it is revealed that the de facto complainant had gone abroad on 1.8.2013 for three months. At that time she kept the gold ornaments (diamonds, necklace, rings, bangles and gold chains weighing 75 sovereigns) in an ornament box and in other small containers and placed the same in the shelf. She had also kept an amount of Rs.60,000/- in a small bag and the same was also kept in the shelf. She locked the shelf and placed the key in a table drawer and locked the bed room and the key was kept inside an almirah in a churidar at the adjacement room. The complainant returned from abroad on 29.10.2013 and found that the key was missing. With the help of a carpenter, W.P.(C) No.31961 of 2013-U 6 when the family members opened the room, the ornament box and the other small boxes were seen lying on the floor and the gold ornaments and cash were seen stolen.
It is respectfully submitted that from the investigation conducted so far and from the circumstantial evidence, it is revealed that the de facto complainant had gone to gulf country on 1.8.2013 and came back on 29.10.2013. During this period many of her relatives and friends visited and stayed back in the house in connection with death of her father. After the demise of her father, her brother Mr. Hakeem and wife Mr. Fousia and their children, and her mother's younger sister Smt. Sajida stayed in the house. It is also revealed that a lady named Belkees who was residing at the nearby house had been a frequent visitor and was in good relation with the complainant. There is no other chance to commit theft of the property without the knowledge or permission of the family members and their close friends. Hence during the course of the investigation, this W.P.(C) No.31961 of 2013-U 7 respondent had collected the finger print impression of the family member and close friends and sent the same to the Finger Print Bureau. The bank account details of her brother Hakeem and his wife Fousia were also collected. On examining the bank account details the above named Fousia, it is revealed that a transaction of of Rs.4 lakhs has been made in the account No.042725300003856 of the Pazhayangadi Branch of the South Indian Bank during the said period. This respondent has questioned Fousia and she had stated that the above transaction was made by her friend at Gulf as loan. During the course of investigation, one Hakeem who is the brother of the complainant made a statement that his wife had revealed about the incident of theft in an unconscious state of mind to the family members and that they had recorded the same in a mobile phone. Though it was instructed to hand over the mobile phone to the S.I. of Police, Pazhayangadi he did not handover the same and later deleted the same from the W.P.(C) No.31961 of 2013-U 8 mobile phone.
It is respectfully submitted that in a meanwhile the above named Hakeem made a complaint before the police authorities against the S.I. of Police, Pazhayangadi alleging that the police had tortured him. As a result of the lodging of the above complaint, the police could not proceed to record the detailed statement of Mr.Hakeem or Mrs. Fousia.
It is submitted that that this
respondent had later recorded the
statements of the de facto complainant
and above named Bulkies and her
husband and her close relatives. Their
finger prints were taken and sent it to the Finger Print Bureau. The investigation is being conducted regarding the role of the above named Bulkies and her husband and also Mr. Hakeem and his wife Fousia in the commission of the crime. The call details of the family members and neighbour Bulkies are collected and the investigation is being continued. A detailed investigation is to be made about Manaf, Nasar and Sabir who were W.P.(C) No.31961 of 2013-U 9 employed abroad and alleged to have given the financial assistance to Mr.Hakeem and Fousia. Earnest and sincere efforts are being done to find out the accused and also to recover the stolen property, for which some more time is required. In that circumstances, it is humbly submitted that at least three months time more may kindly be granted to complete the investigation and to file a final report".
4. On receipt of the statement of the 2nd respondent, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the statement of the 2nd respondent may be recorded and the petition be closed.
5. Considering the fact that extensive investigation is being conducted by the local police now and also considering the fact that they want three more months time to complete the investigation and file final report, there is no need to issue any further direction in this matter and as submitted by the counsel for the petitioner, the statement of the 2nd respondent can be recorded and W.P.(C) No.31961 of 2013-U 10 the petition can be closed with liberty for the petitioner to come either to this Court or move the concerned Magistrate Court if she is not satisfied with the investigation and final report filed by the investigating agency.
With the above observations, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE
rka /true copy/