Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MAHILA PRADHAN AGENTS WELFARE SOCIETY versus THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


MAHILA PRADHAN AGENTS WELFARE SOCIETY v. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM - WP(C) No. 34363 of 2006(N) [2007] RD-KL 2577 (5 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 34363 of 2006(N)

1. MAHILA PRADHAN AGENTS WELFARE SOCIETY,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM.
... Respondent

2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KOTTAYAM.

3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

For Petitioner :SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :05/02/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J

W.P(C).No.34363 of 2006

Dated this the 5th day of February, 2007



JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a Society represented by its Secretary. She is aggrieved by the inadequate and insufficient investigation conducted by the Investigating Officer into Crime No.93 of 2004 of Kottayam East Police Station. Report was called for. It was submitted before the Court that the needful is being done for the proper investigation. Not satisfied with that report, the Investigating Officer was directed to file a statement. The statement has been filed. I have gone through the statement dated 30.01.2007 filed by the 3rd respondent. The crime was registered as early as on 05.03.2004. Till this date, no meaningful or effective investigation has been conducted, it is evident from the report. I am satisfied, that the grievance of the petitioner is most justified and that there must be directions issued to a senior police official to take over the investigation and conduct proper and efficient investigation. I am not embarking on a more detailed discussion on the facts involved lest it might prejudice the interests of the parties. Suffice it to say that I am not at all satisfied that a proper and effective investigation has been conducted so far. The 2nd respondent can now be directed to take over the investigation in the crime and conduct an effective and proper investigation. The 1st W.P(C).No.34363 of 2006 2 respondent can be directed to personally monitor the investigation to be conducted by the 2nd respondent.

2. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed. It is directed that investigation into Crime No.93 of 2004 shall be conducted personally by the 2nd respondent hereafter under the direct supervision and monitoring by the 1st respondent. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned Government Pleader, who shall convey the order to the 1st and 2nd respondents forthwith.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

rtr/-


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.