Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SARASWATHY, AGED 70 YEARS versus THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SARASWATHY, AGED 70 YEARS v. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE - WP(C) No. 2332 of 2007(C) [2007] RD-KL 3931 (21 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 2332 of 2007(C)

1. SARASWATHY, AGED 70 YEARS,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
... Respondent

2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

3. THE SHERISTADAR,

For Petitioner :SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :21/02/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J

W.P.C.No.2332 of 2007

Dated this the 21st day of February 2007



JUDGMENT

The petitioner has come to this court with the grievance that a document - gift deed executed by her deceased husband in her favour, as early as in 1980, which she had produced before the Family Court in connection with a suit filed by her is not being returned by the third respondent, the Sheristadar, Family Court on the plea that the second respondent has directed that the document should not be released to the petitioner by the third respondent.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor was directed to take instructions. The learned Public Prosecutor confirms that the second respondent has instructed the third respondent not to release the document to anyone as crime No.64/03 has been registered in respect of the death of the husband of the petitioner on 13/11/2002. The gift deed which has subsequently been cancelled by the deceased who, in turn, has later executed a gift deed in favour of his son by an earlier marriage is crucially relevant in the investigation into the cause of death of the deceased. The learned Public Prosecutor only prays that reasonable further time may be given to the investigating officer to complete the investigation before the question of release of W.P.C.No.2332/07 2 the document is considered. It is true that the petitioner has not been arrayed as an accused so far. It is also true that no specific and tangible indications pointing to the culpability of the petitioner has been arrived at. But the learned Public Prosecutor submits that, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the investigator may be given three months time to complete the investigation before the question of release of the document is considered by this court. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to dispose of the property and the petitioner shall abide by any reasonable directions that will be issued by this court regarding the retention of the document in her custody.

3. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that the investigator can be given three months further time to complete the investigation. The petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the learned Magistrate thereafter with the request to release the document in her favour.

4. This writ petition is, accordingly allowed in part and the above directions are issued.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr W.P.C.No.2332/07 3 W.P.C.No.2332/07 4

R.BASANT, J

C.R.R.P.No.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF JULY 2006


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.