THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
WRIT APPEAL No.762 of 2022
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. D.Y.N.L.N.Charyulu, learned counsel for
the appellant and Mr. M.Roopender, learned Government
Pleader for Home representing respondents No.1 to 4.
2. This intra-court appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order dated 01.08.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing W.P.No.31073 of 2022 filed by the appellant as the writ petitioner.
3. Appellant had filed the related writ petition taking exception to the inaction of respondents No.2 to 4 in initiating action against respondents No.5 to 12 by arresting them in connection with FIR No.144 of 2022 so as to prevent them from threatening the independent witnesses, thus hampering fair and proper investigation. 2 She further sought for a direction to respondent No.4 to arrest respondents No.5 to 12 in connection with FIR No.144 of 2022.
4. Before the learned Single Judge it was contended on behalf of the appellant that her husband had committed suicide. In this regard, Crime No.144 of 2022 was registered before the Ramannapet Police Station under Rachakonda Commissionerate under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). In the complaint, appellant had specifically mentioned the names of the persons responsible for commission of suicide by her husband. In spite of that, the police had named only respondents No.5 to 12. However, no action has been taken against them.
4.1. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted on the basis of written instructions that in the course of investigation, the investigating officer had examined LW1 to LW22 and had recorded their statements. Those have been sent to the FSL on 04.07.2022. Report of 3 FSL was awaited. He further submitted that on receipt of FSL report, investigating officer would proceed further. 4.2. Learned Single Judge observed that whether to arrest the accused persons or not is completely within the domain of the police and that the writ court would not direct the police to arrest whom and when. Referring to the number of cases pending before the police, learned Single Judge declined to entertain the writ petition.
5. Though rejection of the writ petition was in exercise of the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, nonetheless, applying the principles of Ram Kishan Fauji v. State of Haryana1, such decision of the learned Single Judge certainly falls within the broader ambit of criminal investigation. Therefore, stricto sensu a writ appeal would not lie against such a decision of the learned Single Judge. Having said so, it is open to the appellant to avail her remedy under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to seek speedy and fair investigation 1 (2017) 5 SCC 533 4 which is a fundamental right not only of the accused but of the victim as well.
6. At this stage, learned Government Pleader for Home has assured the Court that investigation would be carried out expeditiously.
7. Subject to the above, writ appeal is disposed of.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ______________________________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 14.03.2023 vs