Thankayyan vs E.K. Sabu
2023 Latest Caselaw 5394 Ker

R.P. No. 901 of 2014              1




               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
    TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 5TH VAISAKHA, 1945
                           RP NO. 901 OF 2014
   AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTWPC 29289/2005 OF HIGH COURT OF
                                  KERALA


REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.1:

              THANKAYYAN
              KUMAR MANDIRAM, IEUMBA, ARUVIKKARA,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
              BY ADV SRI.G.SUDHEER


RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 2 TO 5:

      1       E.K. SABU
              NO. B.3, VIKAS LANE POLICE FAMILY QUARTERS, PMG
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
      2       KERALA LOK AYUKTHA
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
      3       STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME
              DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
      4       J.MOHAN DAS
              SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FORT POLICE STATION,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
      5       JITHA KUMAR
              POLICE CONSTABLE, FOR POLICE STATION,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
              BY ADV SRI.K.B.PRADEEP
              G.P., SRI. SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE


       THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.04.2023,        THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 R.P. No. 901 of 2014             2



                    A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE , J.
              ===========================
                        R.P. No. 901 of 2014
              ============================
                Dated this the 25th day of April, 2023

                             JUDGMENT

This review petition was filed by the 1 st respondent in the writ

petition. The matter is related to an interim order passed by the

Lokayukta for re-investigation of a crime. The Court, noting that the

registration of the crime itself ended in acquittal, closed the matter.

The challenge was made by the Circle Inspector of Police, who was

investigating the crime. I am at utter dismay as to how the 1 st

respondent, who is the complainant, is aggrieved by the closure of

the writ petition. There is no merit in this review. The review petition

fails without prejudice to the 1st respondent who have any remedy

in accordance with the law.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE sbk/-