Back
2022 Supreme(Kar) 953
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S. Sujatha, Ravi V. Hosmani, JJ.
Pramod K.S. - Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka & Ors. - Respondents
W.A. No. 1096/2021 (GM - POLICE)
Decided On : 01-02-2022
K.N. Mohan, Adv, for the Petitioner; T.P. Srinivas, Prl. G.A, for the Respondents
The suspicion of criminal negligence and the request for CBI investigation must be supported by material evidence to warrant further investigation.
Headnote:
Criminal Negligence - Investigation of Unnatural Death - CBI Referral
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, claiming to be the son of the deceased, filed a writ petition seeking investigation into the death of his father. The petition was dismissed by the Single Judge for lacking merit.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the allegations made by the appellant against his brother and the suspicion of criminal negligence were not supported by material evidence. The Court also noted the differences between the brothers and property disputes, and held that the suspicion did not warrant CBI investigation.
Issues: The issues involved the appellant's request for CBI investigation into the death of his father based on allegations of criminal negligence and improper investigation by the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was based on the lack of material evidence supporting the appellant's allegations, the differences between the brothers, and the findings of the Investigation Officer and Post Mortem Report.
Final Decision: The writ appeal was dismissed, upholding the Single Judge's decision to dismiss the writ petition for lacking merit.
JUDGMENT
S. Sujatha, J. - This intra-Court appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the order dated 15.07.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 14594/2020, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant herein, has been disposed of, being devoid of merits.
2. The appellant claiming to be son of late K.S. Satish Kumar had filed the writ petition assailing the endorsement dated 10.09.2019 issued by the respondent No. 3 (Annexure-G) inter alia seeking for a direction to refer the case of death of K.S. Satish Kumar to respondent No. 2 and to direct the respondent No. 4 to investigate in the matter. The arguments of the learned counsel advanced on behalf of the appellant inasmuch as the improper investigation relating to the complaint filed by the appellant has been negatived by the writ Court. Learned Single Judge observing that the writ petition pleadings do not reveal any ground which would warrant granting of relief sought in the prayer, disposed of the matter. Hence, this writ appeal.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate the specific allegation made against the brother of the appellant, Pavan Satish Kumar inasmuch as the unnatural death of his father, Sri. K.S. Satish Kumar on 04.05.2018 vis-à-vis improper investigation made by the respondents. The acts of aggression and intentional criminal negligence on the part of Pavan Satish Kumar certainly warrants investigation to be done by CBI in the absence of proper investigation made by the respondents. Learned Single Judge ought to have entertained the writ petition and referred the matter to CBI for investigation. Thus, seeks to set aside the order of the learned Single Judge and refer the matter for re-investigation by the respondent No. 2 or to refer the matter to the respondent No. 4 - CBI.
4. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the appellant has referred to the following judgments:-
1) Manoj Kumar Thakur vs. State of Karnataka and others (W.P. No. 28092/2013, D.D. 22.11.2013)
2) Narmada Bai vs. State of Gujarat and others [ (2011) 5 SCC 79].
5. Learned AGA appearing for the respondents justifying the impugned endorsement (Annexure - G) submitted that the statements of the mother of the petitioner along with the statements of the other relevant parties recorded by the investigation officer on reporting the unnatural death of K.S. Satish Kumar would reveal that the petitioner has some grudge against his brother, Pavan Satish Kumar and the pending property dispute would be the main cause. Learned AGA has also placed the statement recorded by the mother of the petitioner Smt. Chandrika subsequent to the complaint lodged by the petitioner and also produced the colour photographs relating to the incident in question.
6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material on record.
7. The father of the petitioner, who was aged about 68 years, was a retired employee of I.T.I. Indisputedly, the petitioner is residing abroad for the past several years. All the allegations made against his brother appears to be only on surmises and conjectures. The suspicion raised by the petitioner against his brother is not supported by any material evidence. Smt. Chandrika, wife of the deceased - K.S. Satish Kumar has revealed in the statements made by her before the Investigation Officer about the differences between the two brothers and the indifferent attitude of the petitioner with his brother as well as the property disputes. Having regard to these factual aspects, the learned Single Judge has addressed the grievance raised by the appellant including allegation of negligence of medical emergency. The doubt expressed by the appellant in not providing the medical attention also is held to be a mere suspicion. The appellant sitting abroad cannot imagine things and make bald allegations against his brother, particularly about crimina
