Ashok Bhushan, Ag.CJ.

1. These two Writ Petitions have been filed as public interest litigation raising grievance regarding non registration of First Information Report (FIR) on the allegations made by one Dr. Biju Ramesh, fifth respondent, before media about the bribe given to a Cabinet Minister of the State.

2. W.P(C).No.29856 of 2014 has been filed by two petitioners. First petitioner is the Member of Legislative Assembly of the State of Kerala. Second petitioner claims to be a social and political worker. It has been pleaded in the Writ Petition that the fifth respondent, who is the Working President of the Kerala State Bar and Restaurant Owners' Association, has made revelation that the fourth respondent demanded bribe for ensuring decision by the Government favouring the bar owners in the State of Kerala. The said revelation was made by the fifth respondent before media, which was published in the 'Times of India' daily and other newspapers on 1.11.2014. On the same day the Leader of Opposition has given a letter dated 1.11.2014, which has been produced as Exhibit P2, requesting the Director of Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau to get the allegations investigated after registering FIR.

3. The Director, after receiving the letter of the Leader of Opposition, has issued Exhibit P4(a) order dated 4.11.2014 addressed to the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau forwarding the letter dated 1.11.2014 with a direction to conduct a Quick Verification in the matter by a responsible officer of the rank of DySP and to forward the report within 45 days to his office. The petitioners, feeling aggrieved by the said action, have come up with the Writ Petition praying for the following reliefs:

“i. Call for records leading to Exhibit P4(a) and issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Exhibit P4 (a) in so far as it grants 45 days for filing a report in the preliminary enquiry.

ii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the 3rd respondent to conclude the preliminary enquiry ordered as per Ext.P4(a), within seven days from the ordering of the preliminary enquiry and register a crime on the basis of the allegations made by the 5th respondent against the 4th respondent as is revealed from Ext.P1 and P2, if such allegations taken in its face value amounts to commission of a cognizable offence.

iii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to refrain from conducting a detailed factual enquiry on the allegations made by the 5th respondent against the 4th respondent without registering a crime and filing of first information report.”

4. W.P(C).No.32302 of 2014 has been filed by the petitioner, who is the Convenor of the Left Democratic Front. The said Writ Petition has been filed also raising grievance regarding non-registration of FIR. The petitioner has also prayed for monitoring the investigation by this Court. Following are the prayers made in the Writ Petition:

“i. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 1 to 3, 6 and 7 to draw up a First Information Report and register a crime against the 4th respondent and conduct investigation into the case by constituting a special team so as to bring the culprits to book;

ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction commanding respondent 3 to submit periodical reports regarding the progress of investigation in the case before this Hon'ble Court so as to monitor the investigation.”

5. We have heard Sri. Renjith Thampan, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners in W.P(C). No.29856 of 2014, Sri. K. Gopala Krishna Kurup, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner in W.P(C). No.32302 of 2014 and the learned Advocate General Sri. K.P. Dandapani appearing for the State.

6. The submissions, which have been raised by learned counsel for the petitioners in both the Writ Petitions are more or less similar. The principal submissio