Fathima Bathool vs The Director General Of Police
2022 Latest Caselaw 1788 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022/27TH MAGHA, 1943
                   WP(CRL.) NO. 370 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

            FATHIMA BATHOOL
            AGED 23 YEARS
            D/O. K. BASHEER, BAITHUL- AMAN HOUSE,
            OTHAYOTH PURAYIL, PADANILAM P.O,
            KUNNAMANGALAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673571.
                BY ADV O.D.SIVADAS


RESPONDENTS:

    1       THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - PIN - 695033,
    2       THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (RURAL),
            KOZHIKODE, VADAKARA, PIN - 673104.
    3       THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
            KAKKOOR POLICE STATION,
            KOZHIKODE DISTRICT - 673613.
    4       THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
            DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, (CBCID),
            KOZHIKODE - 673004.



               SRI M P PRASANTH- Public Prosecutor


        THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION    ON   16.02.2022,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(Crl.)No.370 of 2021


                                ..2..




                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by

the improper investigation on the part of the 3 rd respondent in

Crime No.424/2021 of Kakkoor Police Station.

2. The above crime was registered by the Kakkoor

police on the basis of the complaint of the petitioner against

her husband and relatives. Another crime is pending against

the petitioner and her relatives as well.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the 3 rd

respondent, who is in hand in glove with her husband, is not

properly conducting investigation.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instruction,

submits that the investigation is going on in right direction.

The learned Public Prosecutor also submits that, in fact, the

petitioner did not produce the mobile phone to the police when

directed.

5. In these circumstances, I am of the view that this

W.P.(Crl.) can be disposed of with a direction to the 3 rd W.P.(Crl.)No.370 of 2021

..3..

respondent to conduct proper investigation under the

supervision of the 2nd respondent who is the District Police

Chief.

Hence, this W.P.(Crl.) is disposed of with a direction to

the 3rd respondent to conduct proper investigation and file

final report without delay. The 2nd respondent shall supervise

the investigation conducted by the 3rd respondent. The

petitioner shall also co-operate with the investigation.

Sd/-

DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE skj W.P.(Crl.)No.370 of 2021

..4..

APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 370/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 29.06.2021.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 29.06.2021.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 6.7.2021. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CYBER CELL DATED 3.7.2021.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 26.07.2021.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.