Mohammad Kaleem vs The State Of Telangana And 4 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 4283 Tel

   THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

                                 AND

    THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

               WRIT APPEAL No.540 of 2022


JUDGMENT:    (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)



     Heard Mr. Mir Masood Khan, learned counsel for the

appellant and Mr. T.Srikanth Reddy, learned Government

Pleader for Home representing respondent Nos.1 to 4.

2. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated

26.04.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of

Writ Petition No.20933 of 2022 filed by the appellant giving

liberty to him to avail appropriate remedy available under law.

3. On 01.03.2022 petitioner received information at

about 19:56 hours that his son Mohd. Sarfraaz aged about 17

years while proceeding from Tolichowki towards Shaikpet

through the Tolichowki flyover on a motorcycle bearing

registration No.TS 13EH 3718 fell down and died. At the time

of the incident, the son was working as worker in the Medical

& General Store, Salarjing colony, Tolichowki drawing a 2 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.540 of 2022

salary of Rs.4,000.00. The deceased used to deliver medicines

to customers riding his motorcycle. It is stated that the

Medical Store is owned by a police officer by the name of Mr.

Aleem, Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Habeeb Nagar. The

motorcycle did not have any licence but the owner of the

Medical Store used to force the deceased to ride the

motorcycle to deliver medicines to customers. It was on such

assignment on the fateful evening that the accident occurred.

4. According to the appellant, he had lodged a first

information dated 17.03.2022 before the Golkonda Police

Station. He complained that on 01.03.2022 when he received

information, he had contacted Mr. A.Ganesh Goud, Sub-

Inspector of Police who drafted the complaint through his

subordinates and obtained the signature of the appellant in

Urdu since appellant could neither write nor read English.

Contents of the information were not read over and explained

to the appellant. Thereafter, he went to the police station on

many occasions to find out about the incident and the

investigation carried out but nothing was informed to the 3 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.540 of 2022

appellant. Finally, he managed to get a copy of the FIR on

16.03.2022. According to the appellant, in the first

information dated 01.03.2022, on the basis of which FIR

No.81/2022 under Section 304(A) of Indian Penal Code, 1860

(briefly referred to hereinafter as 'IPC') was registered, the

informant A.Ganesh Goud had distorted the version of the

appellant by mentioning that the deceased was driving the

motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner because of which

he collided with the side railing of the flyover and thereafter

fell down on the service road. According to the appellant, the

above distortion was done to dilute application of relevant

provisions of IPC. As a matter of fact because of such first

information, only Section 304A IPC has been invoked.

5. With the above grievance, appellant filed the

related writ petition. Learned Single Judge took the view that

appellant has adequate and efficacious alternative remedy

under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C).

6. Writ Court ordinarily does not entertain writ

petitions questioning registration or non-registration of FIRs 4 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.540 of 2022

etc. Relying on a decision of a co-ordinate bench, it was

observed that in case of non-registration of complaint, the

remedy for the affected person is to file a private complaint.

Thereafter referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in

Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks,

Mumbai1, learned Single Judge took the view that when there

are statutorily engrafted adequate and efficacious alternative

remedy, the writ Court should not entertain a writ petition

but relegate the party to the statutorily available remedy. In

this case, appellant has the remedy to file a private complaint

under Section 200 Cr.P.C. On that basis, giving liberty to the

appellant to avail his remedy, the writ petition was disposed

of.

7. While technically speaking, learned Single Judge

may be right in so holding but application of the law would

depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The

case of death of the son of the appellant cannot be equated

with a civil dispute having alternative remedy. Remedy under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India is a basic feature of

1 (1998) 8 Supreme Court Cases 1 5 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.540 of 2022

our Constitution. It strives to deliver justice where it sees

injustice. The scope and ambit of writ jurisdiction is plenary.

It is guided by the principle of ex-debito justiciae, in other

words to do full and complete justice.

8. Before us we have a citizen who has complained

that his son had died in tragic circumstances. He has doubts

about the veracity of the first information lodged by the

Sub-Inspector of Police who is a colleague of the owner of the

Medical Store in which his deceased son had worked. Specific

allegation of the appellant is that taking advantage of his

illiteracy and lack of knowledge of English language, the

informant had distorted his version while lodging the first

information and thereby diluting more rigorous provision of

the criminal law.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it

is beyond comprehension as to why father of the deceased

would tell the informant police officer that his son was driving

the motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner.

                                  6                   HCJ & CVBRJ
                                                W.A.No.540 of 2022

10. It is true that already F.I.R.No.81 of 2022 has been

registered. However, appellant's first information dated

17.03.2022 can certainly be taken as a statement under

Section 161 Cr.P.C. Supreme Court has time and again

reminded us that investigation into a criminal offence must

not only be speedy but must be done in a fair manner. It

must be not only fair to the accused but also fair to the

victim.

11. Having the above in mind, we are of the view that

it would be just and proper if the Commissioner of Police,

Hyderabad oversees the investigation into F.I.R.No.81/2022

registered before the Golkonda Police Station and if he feels

that it would serve the cause of investigation, he may assign

the investigation to any other investigating authority which

would inspire the confidence of the family members of the

victim. However, in what manner the investigation is to be

carried out is for the investigating authority to decide which is

to be monitored on a regular basis by the Commissioner of

Police, Hyderabad.

                                 7                 HCJ & CVBRJ
                                             W.A.No.540 of 2022

12. Appellant before us is a tailor engaged in petty

tailoring works. His deceased son also worked on a meager

salary of Rs.4,000.00 per month in the Medical Store stated to

be owned by a police officer.

13. In the circumstances, we are also of the view that

Member Secretary of Telangana State Legal Services Authority

should depute a legal aid counsel/para-legal volunteer(s) to

aid and assist the appellant as he navigates the tribulations

of criminal proceedings following the unfortunate death of his

son. Member Secretary shall also inquire as to whether the

family members of the deceased would be entitled to benefit

under any scheme prepared by the State of Telangana or by

the National Legal Services Authority and if so, to extend the

same to the family.

14. We hope and trust all the authorities will rise to

the occasion and do the needful so that justice is rendered.

We leave it open to the Commissioner of Police to ensure that

even if a final report has been submitted under Section 173 8 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.540 of 2022

Cr.P.C, he may ensure filing of supplementary final report if it

is so warranted.

15. This disposes of the Writ Appeal. However, there

shall be no order as to costs.

16. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if

any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.

__________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

___________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J

Date: 25.08.2022 KL