Madras High Court
S.Esakkiammal vs The Superintendent Of Police on 29 August, 2016
Author: S.Vimala
Bench: S.Vimala
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 29.08.2016
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE S.VIMALA
W.P(MD)No.13158 of 2016
S.Esakkiammal ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Superintendent of Police
Tirunelveli District
2.The Inspector of Police
Veervanallur Police Station
Veeravanallur
Tirunelveli District
3.The Director of forensic Department
Kamarajar Salai
Chennai ... Respondents
(R3 has been suo motu impleaded
vide order dated 28.07.2016)
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the 2nd respondent to give the
forensic report of the petitioner's deceased husband Sankarsubbu, confirming
his identity within the time fixed by this Court.
!For Petitioner : Mr.K.Esakki
^For Respondents : Mr.D.Muruganandham
Addl. Govt. Pleader
:O R D E R
Weeping not only for the death of her husband, but continue to weep on account of inability to get the death certificate of her husband due to identity crisis arose on account of identification issues having arisen in the death of her husband.
2. Cataloguing the difficulties which the petitioner was facing not only on account of the death of her husband, but on account of non- availability of the death certificate, this writ petition has been filed for a direction to the 2nd respondent to give the forensic report of the petitioner's deceased husband Sankarsubbu, confirming his identity within the time to be fixed by this Court.
3.Mr.D.Muruganandham, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
5.It is the case of the petitioner that she married Sankarasubbu on 31.08.2007 and they gave birth to two female children by name Ariya Nachiyar and Jeeva Dharshini, who are now aged, 7 and 5 years respectively. It is stated that her husband was a Tailor by profession. It is alleged that her husband was subjected to humiliation by the money lenders and therefore, he moved to Kerala, where his brother-in-law was working and accordingly, he had gone for employment on 26.05.2014 and subsequently, when she contacted, her husband's whereabouts could not be located and she was informed on 02.08.2014 that in the village, a skull was found in the village pond.
5.1. Thereafter, a case has been registered in Crime No.195/2014 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. and the Tahsildar sent the body for postmortem and medical examination was done on 04.08.2014. Even though the petitioner's husband died, the petitioner was not able to get the death certificate. Therefore, a writ petition has been filed in W.P.(MD) No.2783 of 2015 seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the Village Administrative Officer to register the death of her husband and to issue the death certificate. Thereafter, it was informed to the writ Court that the 2nd respondent has taken steps to send the skull for superimposition test towards facilitation of the identification of the deceased. Even after expiry of 1+ years, forensic report was not forthcoming. Therefore, the problem for the petitioner persisted.
6. Under normal circumstances, the petitioner would have been able in a position to get solace on account of some concessions and privileges given to the widow on account of the death of her husband. In the case of the petitioner, even that kind of consolation was lacking on account of non availability of death certificate. Adding fuel to fire, she was compelled to move this Court even to obtain the death certificate.
7. The inconveniences suffered are listed out by the petitioner, which are as under:
i) The two daughters, who are studying in Government school in the village could not obtain concession in the fees, free books and other benefits from the school;
ii) No benefits from the Government could be obtained;
iii) the jewels also could not be redeemed;
iv) name change could not be effected in the relevant documents.
7.1. These difficulties have driven the petitioner to this Court, seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to issue forensic expert opinion.
8. This Court had to persuade as well as compel the forensic department to furnish the forensic report at the earliest point of time and thereafter, forensic report was produced before this Court. Fortunately, for the petitioner, there was a positive finding that the skull could have belonged to the deceased. Under such circumstances, there is prima facie proof for the identity of the deceased and that there is no impediment for the Tahsildar to issue the death certificate to the petitioner.
9. Learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents submitted that there is no prayer for issuance of death certificate by the Tahsildar. Even though there is no express prayer, there is an implied prayer for issuance of death certificate. The holistic reading of the entire pleadings would go to show that the very purpose of the petitioner asking for forensic report is only for the purpose of getting the death certificate from the Tahsildar. The relief asked for such poorly placed petitioner has to be read in between the lines and not by scoring out the lines. The burnings of the petitioner has to be quenched and not to be fanned further by refusing the relief on technical grounds.
10. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with the following direction:
a) The respondent shall furnish a copy of the forensic report to the petitioner forthwith. On getting the copy, the petitioner is directed to give a fresh representation to the Tahsildar along with a copy of the forensic report and on such presentation, the Tahsildar is directed to pass orders and issue necessary death certificate within a period of two weeks thereafter.
b) If there is any impediment to issue the death certificate based on the fresh representation, the certificate has to be issued in continuance of the earlier proceedings dated 14.03.2015. No costs.
To
1.The Superintendent of Police Tirunelveli District
2.The Inspector of Police Veervanallur Police Station Veeravanallur, Tirunelveli District
3.The Director of forensic Department Kamarajar Salai, Chennai
4.The Tahsildar Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District.