Narco analysis tests cannot be conducted without consent, and further investigation is futile after significant time has elapsed since the incident.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner seeks the following reliefs :-

(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the 5th respondent Central Bureau of Investigation to complete their investigation by Narco Analysis Test mentioned in Ext.P8 by taking the assistance and service of a Malayalam knowing experts from Kerala or any such other places of States in India, impartially to claim that their investigation is a fool proof to secure the ends of justice and to prevent the abuse of process of law.

(ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 5th respondent to re-investigate Crime No.12/2001 of Kasba Police Station, Palakkad by taking note of the permission granted by the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate and the consent of respondents 6 to 8 for subjecting them to Narco Analysis Test with the help of Malayalam knowing expert officers of our country; and the periodical monitoring from this Court as and when required;

2. This writ petition was filed in the year 2012 and has been pending for the last 12 years. The issue relates to an incident that occurred on 28.09.2000, when the 7th respondent is alleged to have telephoned the petitioner and informed that few persons came in a car and threatened her and her family and committed theft of an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- which was handed over to them by the petitioner to be kept in their house. The amount of Rs.25,00,000/- is alleged to have been handed over to the 6th accused by the petitioner for depositing in a finance company.

3. Pursuant to the complaint of the petitioner, a crime was registered as FIR No.12 of 2001 of Kasaba Police Station, Palakkad, alleging offence under Section 408 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860. Since depsite the lapse of almost a year, the investigation had not reached anywhere, petitioner approached this Court in O.P.No.12208 of 2001 and by judgment dated 23.07.2001, a learned single Judge of this Court directed the CBI to take up the investigation. Even after the lapse of more than 11 years since the CBI could not nab the culprits, petitioner approached this Court again with this writ petition.

4. Petitioner alleges that respondents 6 to 8 are the persons who had actually committed the offence alleged and that investigation has not been effective or proper and that the said respondents should be subjected to narco analysis as well as other tests that are required under law.

5. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 5th respondent wherein it is stated that after completing the investigation, the CBI filed a final report on 27.06.2003 and closed the case as 'undetected'. However, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate directed a further investigation to be conducted by its order dated 03.04.2006. The CBI thereafter carried out further investigation as directed. Subsequently, when the investigation was not completed, petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(C). No.8420 of 2008 for speeding up the investigation, which was disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the court concerned. In the meantime, on 26.12.2011, the CBI filed a final report again closing the case as 'undetected'. The statement of the 5th respondent further mentions that the Investigating Officer had carried out the investigation as earnestly as possible and as many as 226 persons were questioned and after exhausting all available measures to detect the crime, final report was filed referring the case as 'undetected'. Various details of investigation conducted has also been mentioned in the counter affidavit filed by the 5th respondent.

6. I have heard Smt.Shameera B., the learned counsel for the petitioner