Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

P.K.KUNJAPPAN, PAZHOOR HOUSE versus STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PRINCIPAL

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


P.K.KUNJAPPAN, PAZHOOR HOUSE v. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PRINCIPAL - WA No. 1375 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 10482 (18 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 1375 of 2007()

1. P.K.KUNJAPPAN, PAZHOOR HOUSE,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PRINCIPAL
... Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,

3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

6. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,

For Petitioner :SRI.K.JAJU BABU

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :18/06/2007

O R D E R

H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.

W.A. No. 1375 of 2007

Dated, this the 18th day of June, 2007



JUDGMENT

H.L. DATTU, CJ. We share the agony of the father of the deceased person, but, at the same time, we feel helpless to come to his aid. It is the grievance of the appellant that his son must have been murdered by a third person and the investigation so far done by the respondents is not either fair or proper. According to the appellant, the theory put forward by the respondents that his son had committed suicide and not killed by a third person should not be accepted.

2. The learned Single Judge has traced the history of the case and also the incident that had taken place on the Christmas eve. He has also noticed that investigations had been done first by the Station House Officer and thereafter by the Deputy Superintendent of Police and again by the Superintendent of Police himself. Keeping in view that three enquiries had been done and those enquiries only revealed that the appellant's son had committed suicide and was not killed by any other person, the learned Judge thought it fit to reject the prayer sought for by the petitioner for investigation to be done by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

3. Having gone through the detailed order passed by the learned W.A.No.1375/2007 2 Single Judge and having appreciated the contentions canvassed by the learned counsel for the appellant at the time of hearing of this appeal, we are of the opinion that the learned Judge has not committed any error calling for our interference. In this view of the matter, the appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE. K.T. SANKARAN,

JUDGE.

mt/


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.