Reliefs prayed for in this Writ Petition

In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner who is the father of one Mohammed Shafeeque, who was killed in Police firing on 15.11.2009 at Kasaragod, seeks a writ of Mandamus or any other direction calling upon respondents 2, 3 and 5 (State of Kerala represented by Chief Secretary to Government, Director General of Police and Sub Inspector of Police, Kasaragod) to hand over the investigation of Crime No.85/2010 of Kasaragod Police Station to the 1st respondent (Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi) and a writ of mandamus or any other direction calling upon the 2nd respondent to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs only) to the petitioner as compensation for the death of the petitioner’s son due to gun-shot injuries inflicted by the 6th respondent (Ramdas Pothan) the former Superintendent of Police, Kasaragod.

THE OCCURRENCE (Petitioner’s version)

2. The case of the petitioner is as follows:-

On 15.11.2009 at about 5 pm near the new bus stand at Kasaragod a public meeting was proposed to be conducted for giving a reception to the State leaders of the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML for short) which is a registered political party before the Election Commission of India under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Mohammed Shafeeque aged 23 years, the eldest son of the petitioner, who was employed in the Persian Gulf, was at that time in his native place at Cheruvathur in Hosdrug Taluk. He is a follower of the Kerala State Muslim League which is also a registered political party. The son of the petitioner came to Kasaragod to attend the said meeting. The meeting started at about 5 p.m. The meeting was stopped at 6 pm to enable the Muslims to perform the Magrib prayers. It was announced that the meeting would be resumed at 6.30 pm after the prayers. The petitioner’s son went to the Mosque situated to the south of the Kasaragod-Cherkala National Highway for performing the prayer. At about 6.30 pm, the petitioner’s son was walking towards the venue of the meeting after his prayers. There were some disturbances in some parts of Kasaragod town between the Police and certain anti-social elements during that evening. But there was no disturbance at or around the venue where the meeting was held near the new bus stand at Kasaragod. The 6th respondent, Ramdasan Pothan who was the Head of the Police force in Kasaragod district was standing along with his gunman shouting and hurling abusive words at the people in an angry mood. When the petitioner’s son reached the western side of the new bus stand complex building, the 6th respondent who was in an angry mood suddenly snatched the pistol from the hands of his gun-man and shot at the petitioner’s son on his chest. Mohammed Shafeeque who was fatally wounded fell on the road for a long time without anybody attending on him. It was without any provocation from the side of the petitioner’s son that the 6th respondent opened fire at him and the petitioner’s son succumbed to the bullet injuries sustained on his chest. After realizing that the petitioner’s son was killed by his act of firing, the 6th respondent went to the Kasaragod Police Station and registered a case as Crime No.816/2009 of Kasaragod Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 353, 332, 333, 427 and 307 read with 149 IPC and Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Destruction to Public Property Act. Ext.P4 is the FIR in that case registered against 500 and odd IUML people stating, inter alia, that he fired three rounds out of self defence with the service pistol taken from his gunman to disperse the angry mob which had resorted to violence. No extraordinary circumstances existed at the place to justify the act of the 6th respondent who opened fire at the IUML workers. The 6th respondent was not doing any act in discharge of his official duty. On the contrary, th