SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 1559

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
Abdul Rahman - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
W.P. (Crl.) No. 1334 of 2024
Decided On : 28-05-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Anand Kalyanakrishnan, C. Dheeraj Rajan, Libin Varghese, P. Jahangeer
For the Respondent: Seetha S.

The court directed the 3rd respondent to assess the Case Diary and determine the need for a special investigation team and separate FIRs, emphasizing adherence to established investigative guidelines.

Headnote:

(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections related to investigation and FIR registration - Writ petition seeking direction for the constitution of a special investigation team and adherence to guidelines from Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P. - The court emphasized the need for proper investigation and the role of the 3rd respondent in deciding the necessity of a special investigation team and separate FIRs. (Paras 1-4)

(B) Judicial oversight - The court held that the 3rd respondent must review the Case Diary and determine the appropriate course of action regarding the investigation and FIRs. (Paras 2-4)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners sought a writ for the formation of a special investigation team to investigate complaints of a scam, asserting that separate FIRs should be registered for different victims.

Findings of Court:
The court directed the 3rd respondent to review the Case Diary and decide on the constitution of a special investigation team and the need for separate FIRs.

Issues: The main issues were the necessity of a special investigation team and the registration of separate FIRs for different victims.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the 3rd respondent must assess the Case Diary and determine the appropriate investigative measures, ensuring compliance with established guidelines.

Result: Writ Petition disposed of with directions.

JUDGMENT :

1. The Writ Petition (Crl.) is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to constitute a special investigation team to conduct proper and effective investigation in the complaints preferred by the petitioners, under the Supervision of the 3rd Respondent herein.

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 4th respondent to ensure that the guidelines stipulated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P. & Ors (supra) should be scrupulously followed.

iii. To dispense with the filing of English translation of documents marked in vernacular language.

iv. To grant any such other relief this Hon'ble Court deems fit.”[SIC]

2. The main prayer in this case is to issue a direction to the 2nd respondent to constitute a special investigation team to conduct a proper and effective investigation in the complaints preferred by the petitioners on the supervision of the 3rd respondent.

3. The Public Prosecutor submitted that Crime No. 1157/2024 is registered by the Edakkara Police Station based on the complaint of the 2nd petitioner and the other petitioners are the witnesses in the above crime. According to the petitioners, the victims are different and separate FIR is to be registered. Moreover, it is also submitted that it is a big scam and a special investigation team is to be constituted.

4. After hearing both sides, I am of the considered opinion that the 3rd respondent should look into the matter. The 3rd respondent should summon the Case Diary and decide whether any special investigation team is to be appointed in the facts and circumstances of the case. The 3rd respondent will also decide whether a separate FIR is to be registered for each cases. The decision taken by the 3rd respondent will be communicated to the petitioners. According to the petitioners, the cause of action and the year of the alleged cheating is also different. These are aspects to be considered by the 3rd respondent.

5. Therefore, this Writ Petition (Crl.) is disposed of in the following manner:

1. The 3rd respondent is directed to call for the Case Diary in Crime No. 1157/2024 of Edakkara Police Station, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

2. The 3rd respondent will look into the Case Diary and decide whether a special investigation team is to be constituted for further investigation of the case. The 3rd respondent will also decide whether separate FIR is necessary based on the complaints of the petitioners. The decision taken by the 3rd respondent will be communicated to the petitioners within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top