Jumaila vs State Police Chief
2021 Latest Caselaw 21707 Ker

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                      PRESENT

                        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL

          TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 11TH KARTHIKA, 1943

                              WP(C) NO. 19965 OF 2021

PETITIONER:

               JUMAILA
               AGED 55 YEARS
               W/O LATE PAREETH,
               PUTHUKKULAM ARAKKA VEETTIL,
               THALIKULAM, THRISSUR-680659
               BY ADVS.
               MANSOOR.B.H.
               SAKEENA BEEGUM


RESPONDENTS:

     1         STATE POLICE CHIEF
               POLICE HEAD QUARTERS,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
     2         THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
               OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
               THRISSUR CITY, THRISSUR-680 022.
     3         STATION HOUSE OFFICER
               CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION,
               THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 506.
     4         ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
               CITY CRIME BRANCH,
               CRIME BRANCH OFFICE,
               THRISSUR-680003.
     5         DIRECTOR,
               CENTRAL BEURAUE OF INVESTIGATION,
               PLOT NO 5-B, CGO COMPLEX,
               LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 003.
               BY ADVS.
               GOVERNMENT PLEADER
               SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA
               P.P.SMT.SEENA.C



      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.11.2021, THE

COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No. 19965 of 2021
                                          2



                                   JUDGMENT

Petitioner is the widow of deceased Pareeth S/o Moidutty who

had died on 05.02.2020; after some wordy altercation with his brothers

Ameer and Ali, the deceased had fallen unconscious,on the way to

hopital, he had passed away. On the basis of the information furnished

by one Aboobaker, the brother of the petitioner, Crime No.87/2020 of

Chavakkad police station was registered incorporating Section 174 of

the Cr.P.C. On conclusion of investigation, police laid Ext.P3 final

report stating that it was a natural death due to cardiac arrest, that the

said Pareeth was a cardiac patient. The petitioner moved a protest

complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chavakkad. By

Ext.P4 order, the learned Magistrate directed further investigation

under Section 173 (8) of the Cr.P.C. Now further investigation is

underway.

2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

3. Now the matter is being investigated by the Crime Branch. W.P.(C) No. 19965 of 2021

The present Investigating Officer, who is the Assistant Commissioner

of Police, Crime Branch, Thrissur city filed a detailed statement,

almost confirming that the death was due to natural causes, that is due

to cardiac arrest, that there were civil disputes among the brothers and

a suit as O.S No.1339/2019 is pending before the Munsiff's Court,

Chavakkad.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

investigation was moving on the right track but the present

Investigating Officer is not fair to the petitioner, he is harassing her,

he wants the matter to be settled among the brothers and apprehending

that she may not get a fair treatment from the present Investigating

Officer, she wants the investigation be handed over to the CBI or a

special investigation team under the supervision of an officer not

below the rank of DIG.

5. After hearing counsel on both sides, I am not convinced

that it is a matter requiring investigation by the CBI. The postmortem

report indicates that the death was due to cardiac arrest. But according

to the learned counsel, even though the deceased was a cardiac patient, W.P.(C) No. 19965 of 2021

the stress created by the brothers had accelerated the death, so that

they are liable to be prosecuted under Section 304 of the IPC. It is a

matter to be investigated by the investigating agency and the Court

cannot make any opinion about it. Since the petitioner has expressed

lack of trust in the present Investigating Officer, it is only appropriate

that the investigation conducted by the present Investigating Officer

will be supervised by the Superintendent of Police, District Crime

Branch, Thrissur. Ordered accordingly.

It goes without saying that it is open to the petitioner to move

appropriate forum on filing the final report by the investigating

agency.

With these observations the Writ Petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

K.HARIPAL

JUDGE Jms/02.11

//True Copy// P.A to Judge W.P.(C) No. 19965 of 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19965/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND FIS IN CRIME NO 87/2020 OF CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE POSTMORTEM CERTIFICATE DATED 6.2.2020 ISSUED BY THE DR P.A SHEJU POLICE SEURGEON DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION Exhibit P3 COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO 87/2020 OF CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.11.2020 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE CHAVAKKAD IN CRL.MP NO 3080/2020 IN CRIME NO 87/2020 OF CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 18.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT