Proper filing of FIRs under Section 154 is vital for a valid investigation. Investigations under Sections 174-176 serve a limited purpose, mainly determining apparent causes of death, and cannot substitute for criminal proceedings.

-

-

JUDGMENT :

A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.

The appellant herein was the petitioner in writ petition (Crl). No. 938/2024 and is aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge in the said writ petition.

2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this writ appeal are as follows;

The appellant, is the mother of one Dr.Aneesh Venugopal, who was running a Dental Clinic in Alappuzha and was found dead in his apartment on 24.03.2019. She is essentially aggrieved by the investigation carried out by the investigating agency into the death of her son, and it is her stand that the investigation was not conducted in a fair and satisfactory manner. It is not in dispute before us that Ext.P1 FIR was registered on 24.03.2019 before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Chengannur, and pursuant to that the procedures envisaged under Sections 174 to 176 were duly complied with. A report was thereafter submitted before the Sub- Divisional Magistrate stating that it was a case of unnatural death by hanging. The postmortem report dated 25.03.2019 also suggested that the death was caused by hanging.

3. Since the appellant was not satisfied with the findings in the postmortem report, as also the proceedings before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, and was of the view that the investigation by the local Police was far from satisfactory, she approached this Court through Writ Petition(C) No.13487/2019 for handing over the investigation to the CBCID, Alappuzha. The said writ petition was allowed by judgment dated 22.01.2020 (produced as Ext.P4) whereby this Court directed the handing over of the case to the CBCID, Alappuzha unit.

4. Thereafter, the appellant again approached this Court through Writ Petition (Crl).No.394/2021 seeking a direction to hand over the investigation to a special investigation team or to the Central Bureau of Investigation. By Ext.P5 judgment dated 24.02.2023 in the said writ petition, this Court declined the prayers sought for by the petitioner. Although the appellant preferred W.A. No. 651/2023 impugning the said judgment, taking note of the final report dated 17.02.2024 that was filed by the Crime Branch in the meanwhile, she withdrew the writ appeal reserving her liberty to challenge the final report in appropriate proceedings.

5. Writ Petition (Crl).No.938/2024, from which this appeal arises, was then filed by the appellant impugning the final report dated 17.02.2024. The prayer in the writ petition was essentially for a direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation to initiate de novo investigation into the death of the appellant’s son as also for a declaration that Ext.P6 final report was per se arbitrary illegal and in violation of the statutory duties of the 2nd respondent and therefore to set aside the same.

-

6. The learned Single Judge who considered the matter found that since the appellant was dissatisfied with the investigation that was carried on by the Crime Branch, which was appointed as an investigating agency at the instance of the appellant herself, the additional 4th respondent-Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Alappuzha could be directed to call for the case diary and look into it after hearing the appellant and direct a further investigation to be carried out if found necessary. The writ petition was therefore disposed of with the following directions;

“1. The additional 4th respondent-Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Alappuzha is directed to summon the case diary in this case within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. Once the case diary is received, the additional 4th respondent will pursue the same and hear the grievance of the petitioner and thereafter, decide whether any further inve