Hameed Kidanhi vs Yadeesh Chandra Ips
2021 Latest Caselaw 3824 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3824 Ker
Judgement Date : 2 February, 2021

Kerala High Court

Hameed Kidanhi vs Yadeesh Chandra Ips on 2 February, 2021

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

     TUESDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 13TH MAGHA,1942

           Con.Case(C).No.59 OF 2021 IN WP(C). 8272/2019

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 8272/2019(H) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA


PETITIONER:

               HAMEED KIDANHI
               AGED 54 YEARS
               S/O. MAMMED, KIDANJHI HOUSE,
               KIDANHI P.O, PIN 670 675

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (SR.)
               SMT.K.S.SANTHI
               SMT.LATHA SUSAN CHERIAN
               SRI.GEORGE A.CHERIAN

RESPONDENTS:

      1        YADEESH CHANDRA IPS,
               AGED 40 YEARS
               DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KANNUR

      2        P.P PREMARAJAN,
               AGED 50 YEARS
               DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
               DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH OFFICE, KANNUR

               R1-2 BY SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, SENIOR GOVT.PLEADER

     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 02.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case(C).No.59 OF 2021

IN WP(C). 8272/2019                              2




                                      JUDGMENT

The petitioner herein is the victim in Crime No.513 of 2017 and 697

of 2018 of the Chockli police station. Complaining of inefficient and

ineffective investigation, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing

W.P.(C) No.8272 of 2019.

2. This Court found considerable merit in the contentions

advanced by the petitioner and by judgment dated 23.7.2019, the

following directions were issued:

"a. I direct the 2nd respondent to call for the files of Crime No.513/2017 and Crime No.697/2019 of Chokli Police Station and meticulously peruse the records of investigation conducted till date. If the investigation is found wanting, and if any lapses are found, necessary action shall be taken against the officers. It shall be borne in mind that the investigation in Crime No.513/2017 was handed over to the officer pursuant to orders passed by this Court by Ext.P5 judgment in W.P.(C) No.21097 of 2017.

b. The 2nd respondent shall hand over the investigation in the above referred crimes to an upright and honest officer not below the rank of Dy.S.P of the Crime Branch, within a period of 15 days from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. The officer, to whom investigation is handed over by this Court, shall expeditiously conduct the investigation and submit a report before Court in an expeditious manner. The investigation conducted by Con.Case(C).No.59 OF 2021

the officer shall be monitored by the 2nd respondent on a weekly basis.

3. The petitioner contends that nothing happened thereafter.

He has now been served with Annexure 5 letter by the Investigating

Officer which reveals that the investigation conducted by the officer is

perfunctory in nature. Even the accused against whom serious

accusations have been alleged have not been arrested despite the lapse

of almost three years.

4. The Investigating Officer was directed to file a statement. A

statement has been filed by the 2nd respondent detailing the steps taken

by him and the manner in which the investigation is being proceeded

with. It is stated that the accused have moved an application for

anticipatory bail and that is the reason why they have not been arrested.