Kerala High Court
Sheeba Mol vs State Of Kerala on 21 August, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 KER 963
Author: V.G.Arun
Bench: V.G.Arun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1942
WP(C).No.16593 OF 2020(Y)
PETITIONER:
SHEEBA MOL
AGED 38 YEARS
W/O.LATE MATHAI P.P.,
PADINJARECHARUVIL HOUSE, NEELIPILAVU P.O.,
KUDAPPANAKKULAM, CHITTAR AREEKKAVU,
VADASSERIKARA VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689 663.
BY ADVS.
SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN
SRI.JOHNY K.GEORGE
SRI.M.KIRANLAL
SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA)
SRI.T.S.SARATH
SHRI.SAMEER M NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, STATE OF KERALA,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS,
STATE OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3 THE STATE POLICE CHIEF
POLICE HEADQUARTERS,
STATE OF KERALA, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695010.
4 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
PATHANAMTHITTA - 689 645.
5 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
DISTRICT SPECIAL BRANCH,
PATHANAMTHITTA - 689645.
WP(C).No.16593 OF 2020(Y) 2
6 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
SPECIAL CRIME BRANCH,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 008.
BY SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, SENIOR GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.16593 OF 2020(Y) 3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 21st day of August 2020 The widow of a small time farmer, is before this Court, voicing her grievance regarding the manner in which investigation is being conducted into the unnatural death of her husband. According to the petitioner, her husband, P.P.Mathai, was taken into custody by the Forest Officials illegally and subjected to torture and thereafter, found dead in a well inside the compound of his parental house. It is alleged that the forest officials, who were present when the death occurred, absconded from the scene, leaving behind the jeep in which they had brought Mathai to the spot.
2. The police had initially registered Crime No.685 of 2020 at the Chittar police Station under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code ( for short 'Cr.P.C.'). The widow, other relatives of the deceased and residents of the area raised hue and cry regarding the manner in which the investigation was being WP(C).No.16593 OF 2020(Y) 4 handled. They demanded immediate arrest of the forest officials and to entrust the investigation with the Crime Branch. Dissatisfied with the response to their demand, the Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to entrust the investigation with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
3. On 13.8.2020 this court had directed the District Chief Police, Pathanamthitta to file a statement detailing the steps taken with respect to the investigation. Accordingly, a statement is filed today and confidential details regarding the investigation made available in a sealed cover.
4. The statement reveals that, though the crime was initially registered under Section 174 of Cr.P.C., offences punishable under Sections 342, 348, 364(A), 330, 304, 404, 465, 471, 201, 166, 167 and r.w.34 of the Indian Penal Code have since been incorporated. It is stated that around 60 witnesses were questioned a dummy test conducted and the investigation is progressing correctly. So far, no accused has been named or arrested. The reasons for not naming the accused and arresting the perpetrators at this stage, WP(C).No.16593 OF 2020(Y) 5 has been stated in the report submitted in the sealed cover.
5. Sri. Suman Chakravarthy, the learned Senior Government Pleader submits that, even though the investigation is progressing in the proper manner, the state has no objection in handing over the investigation to the CBI.
6. Sri. Manu Ramachandran, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the statement is indicative of glaring flaws in the investigation and the very fact that no accused has been named till date and no arrest made, shows laxity on the part of the investigating officer.
7. The State having fairly submitted that it has no objection in handing over the investigation to the CBI, which in fact is the relief sought in the writ petition, it would be inappropriate for this Court to make any comments on the investigation so far conducted, since it is for the new investigating agency to look into those aspects.
8. In view of the submission made on behalf of the State Government, respondents 1 and 2 are directed to WP(C).No.16593 OF 2020(Y) 6 take necessary steps to entrust the investigation in Crime No. 685/2020 of Chittar Police Station to the Central Bureau of Investigation forthwith.
9. I hope and expect that the Central Bureau of Investigation will take over the investigation immediately and do the needful through the sixth respondent to conduct a thorough investigation, so that justice is rendered to the family of the deceased.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN JUDGE DCS WP(C).No.16593 OF 2020(Y) 7 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.685/2020 OF CHITTAR POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA.
EXHIBIT P1(A) THE TRUE COPY OF THE FI STATEMENT OF THE PETITIONER IN EXT.P1 FIR WITH ALONG WITH THE TRUE TYPEWRITTEN COPY.
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORM-1 REPORT VIDE.
O.R.6/2020 OF CHITTAR FOREST STATION ALONG WITH MAHASAR DATED 28/07/2020.
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 08/08/2020 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH ALONG WITH THE COPY OF EMAIL.