JUDGMENT

Petitioner seeks for a direction to entrust the investigation of crime No.242/2023 of Alappuzha South Police Station with the Crime Branch. According to the petitioner no proper investigation is being conducted by the

4th respondent and hence Crime Branch investigation is essential.

2. The prosecution alleges that the accused had, after the death of the defacto complainant’s wife, fabricated a document by forging the signature of the defacto complainant and filed OS No.592/2022 before the Munsiff’s Court, Alappuzha, claiming an amount of Rs.3,19,070/- and thereby committed the offences under Section 463, 464, 465, 468, 470 & 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the original of the alleged forged document has been produced before the Munsiff’s Court by the accused and the investigating officer has already approached the Munsiff’s Court, seeking handing over of the original document, to subject it to forensic examination for the purpose of investigation and orders are awaited.

4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that application for obtaining release of the document from the Munsiffs Court was filed only after this Writ Petition was preferred by petitioner.

5. Considering the facts of this case, I am of the view that since the investigating officer has already preferred an application before the Munsiff’s Court for release of the document, the investigation cannot be said to being conducted improperly, warranting an investigation by the Crime Branch.

6. Further, if in case any delay in the conduct of investigation is taking place, the petitioner is always left with the remedy of approaching the jurisdictional Magistrate for monitoring the investigation. Therefore, considering the peculiar circumstance of the case, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case for directing entrustment of the investigation with another agency.

7. Generally, Courts ought not to interfere with the conduct of investigation by the regular agency, except for exceptional circumstances. Mere delay in completing the investigation by itself cannot be said to be on exceptional circumstance, given that the crime was registered only in the year 2023. Hence, reserving the liberty of the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate for monitoring the investigation if the circumstances so warrant, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

If in case the investigating officer delays continuing the investigation, petitioner is given the liberty to approach this Court also. With these observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of.