Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 11]

Kerala High Court

G.Chandramohanan Nair vs The State Of Kerala on 23 February, 2002

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                              PRESENT:

                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

           THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH 2016/13TH PHALGUNA, 1937

                                 WP(C).No. 11045 of 2006 (M)
                               ----------------------------------------------
  F.I.R.NO.114/2003 OF MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION AND F.I.R.NO.89/2003
                             OF KADINAMKULAM POLICE STATION
                                         -------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :
--------------------------

           G.CHANDRAMOHANAN NAIR, AGED 54 YEARS,
           S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, KUMBATH PANAYIL VEEDU, KARICHARA,
           PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

           BY ADV. SRI.M.R.RAJESH

RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------

        1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
           GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

        2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
           OFFICE OF THE D.G.P., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

        3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
           KAZHAKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

        4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
           KADINAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

        5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
           MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

        6. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER (SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE),
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

        7. DELHI SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT, (CENTRAL BUREAU OF
           INVESTIGATION), REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR, NEW DELHI.

        8. THE KERALA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
           REP.BY ITS SECRETARY.

           R1 TO R6 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.MAYA
           R7 BY ADV. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHARA PILLAI, C.B.I.

           THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
           ON 03-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
           FOLLOWING:
Msd.

WP(C).No. 11045 of 2006 (M)
--------------------------------------------

                                              APPENDIX



PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
-----------------------------------------

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED TO THE DGP
                    DATED 23.02.2002.

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.364/2002 OF MUNSIFF'S
                    COURT, ATTINGAL.

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE
                    THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 27.10.2002.

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED TO THE DGP
                    DATED 07.11.2002.

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED TO THE DGP
                    DATED 27.11.2002.

EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE
                    THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 07.02.2003.

EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE JFMC-II,
                    ATTINGAL.

EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE PRELIMINARY COMMISSION REPORT IN
                    O.S.NO.364/2002 DATED 14.03.2003.

EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR ALONG WITH EXT.P8 REPORT IN
                    O.S.NO.364/2002 DATED 12.03.2003.

EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY COMMISSION REPORT IN
                    O.S.NO.364/2002 DATED 30.04.2003.

EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL COMMISSION REPORT IN
                    O.S.NO.364/2002 DATED 21.07.2003.

EXHIBIT P12: TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.89/2003 OF KADINAMKULAM POLICE
                    STATION.

EXHIBIT P13: TRUE COPY OF THE POST MORTEM REPORT DATED 30.06.2003.

EXHIBIT P14: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION BEFORE THE 8TH RESPONDENT
                    DATED 03.07.2003.

EXHIBIT P15: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 25.07.2003 BEFORE
                    THE CHIEF MINISTER.

EXHIBIT P16: TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN FIR 89/2003 OF
                    KADINAMKULAM POLICE STATION.

WP(C).No. 11045 of 2006 (M)
----------------------------------------------

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :
-------------------------------------------------

ANNEXURE R3(A): A TRUE COPY OF THE POSTMORTEM CERTIFICATE
                               OF DR.K.PADMAKUMAR, MEDICAL OFFICER, DEPARTMENT
                               OF FORENSIC MEDICINE, MEDICAL COLLEGE,
                               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

                                                           //TRUE COPY//


                                                           P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.



                       B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

        `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                  W.P.(C) No.11045 of 2006
        `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
              Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2016

                          J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned Standing Counsel for the CBI.

2. Petitioner prays for a further investigation in Crime No.89/2003 of Kadinamkulam Police Station by the CBI.

3. Petitioner is the son of deceased Gopalakrishnan Nair. On going through the records, it has come out that the deceased was aged 83 at the time of his death. Ext.P13 is the postmortem certificate. Ext.P13 shows six antemortem WPC.11045/2006 : 2 : injuries. Most of the injuries are evidently bedsores. The opinion as to cause of death was that the death was due to infection (natural). It seems that there was enmity between the petitioner and his sister. There were litigations also between them.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has pointed out that at the time of death, the deceased was being looked after by the sister of the petitioner and the death had occurred at the house of the sister.

5. On going through the postmortem certificate, it seems that there is absolutely nothing to suspect in the cause of death noted by the Medical Officer of the Forensic Department of the Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram. It seems that the death was quite natural and most of the injuries were bedsores. In such case, no fruitful purpose would be served in carrying out a further investigation in the matter. On going through the records and hearing the submissions of the learned counsel, this Court is of the view WPC.11045/2006 : 3 : that there is no scope for a further investigation in the matter and, therefore, this writ petition is only to be dismissed, and I do so.

In the result, this writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

(B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE) aks/03/03 // True Copy // PA to Judge