THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.540 of 2022
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. Mir Masood Khan, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr. T.Srikanth Reddy, learned Government
Pleader for Home representing respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 26.04.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of Writ Petition No.20933 of 2022 filed by the appellant giving liberty to him to avail appropriate remedy available under law.
3. On 01.03.2022 petitioner received information at about 19:56 hours that his son Mohd. Sarfraaz aged about 17 years while proceeding from Tolichowki towards Shaikpet through the Tolichowki flyover on a motorcycle bearing registration No.TS 13EH 3718 fell down and died. At the time of the incident, the son was working as worker in the Medical & General Store, Salarjing colony, Tolichowki drawing a 2 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.540 of 2022 salary of Rs.4,000.00. The deceased used to deliver medicines to customers riding his motorcycle. It is stated that the Medical Store is owned by a police officer by the name of Mr. Aleem, Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Habeeb Nagar. The motorcycle did not have any licence but the owner of the Medical Store used to force the deceased to ride the motorcycle to deliver medicines to customers. It was on such assignment on the fateful evening that the accident occurred.
4. According to the appellant, he had lodged a first information dated 17.03.2022 before the Golkonda Police Station. He complained that on 01.03.2022 when he received information, he had contacted Mr. A.Ganesh Goud, Sub- Inspector of Police who drafted the complaint through his subordinates and obtained the signature of the appellant in Urdu since appellant could neither write nor read English. Contents of the information were not read over and explained to the appellant. Thereafter, he went to the police station on many occasions to find out about the incident and the investigation carried out but nothing was informed to the 3 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.540 of 2022 appellant. Finally, he managed to get a copy of the FIR on 16.03.2022. According to the appellant, in the first information dated 01.03.2022, on the basis of which FIR No.81/2022 under Section 304(A) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (briefly referred to hereinafter as 'IPC') was registered, the informant A.Ganesh Goud had distorted the version of the appellant by mentioning that the deceased was driving the motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner because of which he collided with the side railing of the flyover and thereafter fell down on the service road. According to the appellant, the above distortion was done to dilute application of relevant provisions of IPC. As a matter of fact because of such first information, only Section 304A IPC has been invoked.
5. With the above grievance, appellant filed the related writ petition. Learned Single Judge took the view that appellant has adequate and efficacious alternative remedy under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C).
6. Writ Court ordinarily does not entertain writ petitions questioning registration or non-registration of FIRs 4 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.540 of 2022 etc. Relying on a decision of a co-ordinate bench, it was observed that in case of non-registration of complaint, the remedy for the affected person is to file a private complaint. Thereafter referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai1, learned Single Judge took the view that when there are statutorily engrafted adequate and efficacious alternative remedy, the writ Court should not entertain a writ petition but relegate the party to the statutorily available remedy. In this case, appellant has the remedy to file a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. On that basis, giving liberty to the appellant to avail his remedy, the writ petition was disposed of.
7. While technically speaking, learned Single Judge may be right in so holding but application of the law would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The case of death of the son of the appellant cannot be equated with a civil dispute having alternative remedy. Remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is a basic feature of 1 (1998) 8 Supreme Court Cases 1 5 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.540 of 2022 our Constitution. It strives to deliver justice where it sees injustice. The scope and ambit of writ jurisdiction is plenary. It is guided by the principle of ex-debito justiciae, in other words to do full and complete justice.
8. Before us we have a citizen who has complained that his son had died in tragic circumstances. He has doubts about the veracity of the first information lodged by the Sub-Inspector of Police who is a colleague of the owner of the Medical Store in which his deceased son had worked. Specific allegation of the appellant is that taking advantage of his illiteracy and lack of knowledge of English language, the informant had distorted his version while lodging the first information and thereby diluting more rigorous provision of the criminal law.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is beyond comprehension as to why father of the deceased would tell the informant police officer that his son was driving the motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner.
6 HCJ & CVBRJ
W.A.No.540 of 2022
10. It is true that already F.I.R.No.81 of 2022 has been registered. However, appellant's first information dated 17.03.2022 can certainly be taken as a statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Supreme Court has time and again reminded us that investigation into a criminal offence must not only be speedy but must be done in a fair manner. It must be not only fair to the accused but also fair to the victim.
11. Having the above in mind, we are of the view that it would be just and proper if the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad oversees the investigation into F.I.R.No.81/2022 registered before the Golkonda Police Station and if he feels that it would serve the cause of investigation, he may assign the investigation to any other investigating authority which would inspire the confidence of the family members of the victim. However, in what manner the investigation is to be carried out is for the investigating authority to decide which is to be monitored on a regular basis by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad.
7 HCJ & CVBRJ
W.A.No.540 of 2022
12. Appellant before us is a tailor engaged in petty tailoring works. His deceased son also worked on a meager salary of Rs.4,000.00 per month in the Medical Store stated to be owned by a police officer.
13. In the circumstances, we are also of the view that Member Secretary of Telangana State Legal Services Authority should depute a legal aid counsel/para-legal volunteer(s) to aid and assist the appellant as he navigates the tribulations of criminal proceedings following the unfortunate death of his son. Member Secretary shall also inquire as to whether the family members of the deceased would be entitled to benefit under any scheme prepared by the State of Telangana or by the National Legal Services Authority and if so, to extend the same to the family.
14. We hope and trust all the authorities will rise to the occasion and do the needful so that justice is rendered. We leave it open to the Commissioner of Police to ensure that even if a final report has been submitted under Section 173 8 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.540 of 2022 Cr.P.C, he may ensure filing of supplementary final report if it is so warranted.
15. This disposes of the Writ Appeal. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
16. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.
__________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ___________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J Date: 25.08.2022 KL