Kerala High Court
M.K.Sanjeev vs Sri.Loknath Behra Ips (Ker-85) on 26 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1942
Con.Case(C).No.1684 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 26641/2019
IN THE JUDGMENT DATED 13/11/2019 IN WP(C) 26641/2019(E) OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
M.K.SANJEEV,
AGED 55 YEARS,
S/O. KESAVAN,
MULACKAL HOUSE,
EAST KORATTY P.O,
CHIRANGARA,
THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PRINCIPAL, CHAITHANYA PUBLIC SCHOOL,
CHALAKUDY,
THRISSUR DISTRICT
BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY)
RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT:
SRI.LOKNATH BEHRA IPS (KER-85),
AGED 59 YEARS,
S/O. NOT KNOWN DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
POLICE HEAD QUARTERS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PIN - 695 010
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER
R1 BY SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, SENIOR GOVT.PLEADER
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 26.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No.1684 OF 2020
IN
WP(C). 26641/2019
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 26th day of February, 2021
The applicant has approached this Court for
contempt of the order of this Court in WP(C) No.26641/2019
dated 13.11.2019, in which it was directed that Ext.P5
complaint filed by the petitioner shall be inquired into or
investigated and the investigation/inquiry be completed
within a period of two months.
2. The applicant has now approached this Court
stating that despite an order to complete the
investigation/inquiry within a period of two months, the
Police have been recalcitrant and have not done anything.
Hence, the indolence of the Police needs to be visited with
action for contempt.
Con.Case(C).No.1684 OF 2020
IN
WP(C). 26641/2019
3. The Police Chief Thrissur (Rural), has through the
Sr. GP, filed a statement to the effect that in fact the inquiry
was already completed on the date, the writ petition was
taken up for consideration, but, due to some communication
gap, it was not so communicated to the court. Ext.P5 petition
was already disposed of and that it was consequent to that,
an order was passed by this Court to complete the
inquiry/investigation enquiry within a period of two months.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has also produced a
copy of the file pertaining to the completion of the enquiry
on 23.08.2017. And the communication was also sent to the
petitioner on 24.08.2017 itself. As that fact was left out to
be mentioned before the court, the Order was passed to
dispose of the matter within two months. There is no failure
or latches on the part of the Police authorities in complying
with the directions of this Court. The learned Public
Con.Case(C).No.1684 OF 2020
IN
WP(C). 26641/2019
Prosecutor has submitted that as the writ petition was
disposed of in consequence of the miscommunication to the
court. If the court so deems it fit to conduct any further
inquiry, the respondent is willing to comply.
5. Considering the materials which have been
produced before this Court, I find that an inquiry was
conducted and the applicant was also informed as seen from
the despatch register. But, the applicant has not approached
the criminal court of competent jurisdiction with a private
complaint, because that is the remedy that is available to
him. The direction to the Police was to dispose of the petition
filed by the petitioner either by inquiry or investigation, there
was no specific direction to register an FIR. The learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that
immediately on receipt of the complaint, an FIR ought to
have been registered.
Con.Case(C).No.1684 OF 2020
IN
WP(C). 26641/2019
6. But in case, an FIR is not registered, the remedy
open to the applicant is to approach the criminal court of
competent jurisdiction and to file a complaint and the
Magistrate has the option either to send it to the SHO for the
investigation after registering an FIR under S.156(3) Cr.P.C
or to take cognizance itself and proceed with the inquiry.
And, therefore, I find there is no contempt on the
part of the respondent, and the contempt petition is,
therefore, dismissed.
Sd/-
ASHOK MENON
JUDGE
NR/26/02/2021
Con.Case(C).No.1684 OF 2020
IN
WP(C). 26641/2019
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
13-11-2019 IN W.P(C) NO. 26641 OF
2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE-R1(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER
NO.83/PTN/AP/SBTSR/R/17 DATED
23.08.2017.
ANNEXURE-R1(b) A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
26.05.2017 IN W.P.(c) 15547/2017
ANNEXURE-R1(c) A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION ADDRESSED
TO THE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA DATED
19.07.2017.
ANNEXURE-R1(d) A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED
14.08.2017 OF THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DISTRICT
SPECIAL BRANCH, THRISSUR RURAL.
ANNEXURE-R1(e) A COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
23.08.2017 TO THE DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF, THRISSUR, RURAL.
ANNEXURE-R1(f) A COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
DESPATCH REGISTER OF THE OFFICE OF
THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
SPECIAL BRANCH, THRISSUR RURAL.
ANNEXURE-R1(g) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
STAMP ACCOUNT REGISTER OF THE OFFICE
OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF
POLICE, SPECIAL BRANCH, THRISSUR.
