IMPORTANT POINT
Investigation by a Sub Inspector in a murder case is valid under statutory provisions despite a Circular suggesting higher authority involvement.

ORDER :

(A. Badharudeen, J.)

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’ for short), by the sole accused in S.C.No.1027/2023 on the files of the Court of Sessions, Manjeri, seeking the following prayers:

“I) Quash Annexure:A1 Final Report in S.C.No.1027/2023 on the file of the Court of Sessions, Manjeri Division.

II) To pass an order directing the second respondent to conduct a further investigation in Crime No.256/2023 of Vazhakkad Police Station.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the relevant documents.

3. In this matter, the prosecution alleges commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’ for short) by the accused. The specific allegation is that the accused, who is none other than the husband of the victim, married the victim on 16.07.2010, as per religious ceremonies. While living as husband and wife, the victim noticed the illicit relationship of the accused with other ladies and she informed the same to the parents, siblings and neighbours. That apart, she informed the same to one Arif Yasin, a friend of the accused, through WhatsApp. The above said Arif Yasin watched the activities of the accused and when the accused came to know about this, he quarreled with the victim and she was forced to leave the matrimonial home one week before the occurrence. Before that, there was a quarrel between the accused and the victim at about 6 am on 01.04.2023 and the 2nd witness intervened and cooled the situation. While so, at about 3.30 hours on 02.04.2023, while the victim was sitting in the work area of the house of the 9th witness, and witness Nos.1 and 5 moved towards her house at Vazhakkad for eating Suhoor before Ramzan fasting, the accused, because of rivalry, with intention to do away with the victim, slapped her on the right side of her face near the eye by using his hand, caught hold on her hair, and hit her forehead on the wall. Thereby the victim became unconscious. Later, the accused covered the nose and mouth of the victim by using a shawl and murdered her between 4 hours and 4.47 hours. Thus the prosecution alleges commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.

4. At the time of admission hearing, one cardinal point argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner was that, the investigation of this grave crime of murder had been conducted by the Sub Inspector of Police, against the mandate of Annexure 3 Circular No.16/2018 issued by the Director General of Police, as on 12.06.2018, modifying ‘the grave crime list’, incorporating various offences and according to the learned counsel, offence of 302 of IPC is a very grave crime and as per this Circular, the investigation is to be carried out by the Deputy Superintendent of Police/Assistant Superintendent of Police. Since the investigation had been completed in this crime without obeying the circular, the same is vitiated and therefore, the matter would require further investigation by higher officials in tune with the mandate of the circular. It is argued further that as per Section 4 of the Kerala Police Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as ‘KP Act’ for short), the Police Officer shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, perform the functions enlisted in (a) to (s). It is pointed out that as per Section 4(n) of the KP Act, it is the duty of a police officer to obey and execute lawfully all lawful commands of competent authorities and official superiors. Therefore, Annexure 3 Circular should have been obeyed by the Investigating Officer in this crime and in view of Section 4(n) of the KP Act, there is violation of statutory prescription.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that even though Annexure 3 Circular provides as submitted by the learned counsel for the p