Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RATHEESH, S/O.JANARDHAN NAIR versus STATE OF KERALA, (THE SUB INSPECTOR OF

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


RATHEESH, S/O.JANARDHAN NAIR v. STATE OF KERALA, (THE SUB INSPECTOR OF - WP(C) No. 6527 of 2007(B) [2007] RD-KL 9912 (8 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 6527 of 2007(B)

1. RATHEESH, S/O.JANARDHAN NAIR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, (THE SUB INSPECTOR OF
... Respondent

2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

For Petitioner :SRI.T.S.JOHN

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :08/06/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.C.No. 6527 of 2007 B
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 8th day of June, 2007



JUDGMENT

The petitioner has come to this Court complaining about the inaction by the police on a complaint lodged by him about an incident on the night of 13.11.2006. Ext.P2 is the complaint. The petitioner has a case that later about the same incident complaints had been raised by others also before various authorities. In short the grievance is that no F.I.R. has been registered on Ext.P2 complaint.

2. Notice was given to the learned Prosecutor. A statement has been filed. The short contention raised is that Ext.P2 does not reveal the commission of any cognizable offence. The learned Prosecutor submits that a careful reading of Ext.P2 must convey that it was only an innocuous wordy altercation between neighbours about the right of way and the attempts to make or develop a pathway. The learned Prosecutor asserts that Ext.P2 does not reveal the commission of any cognizable offence to justify registration of an F.I.R. on the basis of Ext.P2. W.P.C.No. 6527 of 2007 2

3. I have read and re-read Ext.P2. I am in agreement with the learned Prosecutor that at worst the only reasonable conclusion that is possible from the assertions and recitals in Ext.P2 is that there was a dispute about a way and there was a wordy altercation between the rivals. At any rate, for not registering a crime on the basis of Ext.P2, I am satisfied that the respondents cannot be found fault with. Nor can the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction available to this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or under Article 226 of the Constitution be invoked against the respondents on that score.

4. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (R. BASANT) Judge tm W.P.C.No. 6527 of 2007 3

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.C.Nos. 6527 of 2007
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 27th day of February, 2007

O R D E R

The short grievance of the petitioner is that no action has been taken on Ext.P2 complaint filed before the Sub Inspector on a complaint acknowledged by the Circle Inspector under Ext.P3 and Ext.P7 complaint sent to the Superintendent of Police. The learned Prosecutor takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. He shall take instructions. Call on 13.3.2007. W.P.C.No. 6527 of 2007 4 (R. BASANT) Judge tm


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.