IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL FRIDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 10000 OF 2018 PETITIONER/S:

STATE BANK OF INDIA (FORMERLY STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE)P.B.S BRANCH, PATHANAMTHITTA, PATHANAMTHITTA P.O,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER A.K ANIL(NOW WORKING AS CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA,REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, SASTHAMANGALAM, TRIVANDRUM)

BY ADV SRI.K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN(THIRUVALLA)

RESPONDENT/S:

1 DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE KERALA, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS,TRIVANDRUM, PIN 695 001

2 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF PATHANAMTHITTA, PATHANAMTHITTA P.O,PIN 689 645

3 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN 689 645 SMT V.SREEJA-SR.PP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON

15.02.2022, THE COURT ON 01.04.2022 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Petitioner in this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is State Bank of India, formerly State Bank of Travancore, Pathanamthitta branch, represented by its Manager who is the defacto complainant in Crime No. 1260/2010 of Pathanamthitta police station registered under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. That crime was registered on 20.11.2010 alleging offence against one Jisha K. Joy. Going by the statement of facts, on 18.11.2010 the said Jisha K. Joy had pledged three bangles weighing 45.5 grams claiming to be genuine gold and borrowed an amount of Rs.55,000/- from the bank. The loan was sanctioned after the gold was tested by the appraiser Nadesan Asari. Thus the amount was disbursed to the said person. In the evening, when the pledged ornaments were taken to the locker, the petitioner felt some suspicion about the purity of the gold, so that on the next day morning the appraiser was called to the bank and was asked to conduct an acid test. When acid test was conducted, it came out that it is spurious gold, gold coated ornaments. When verified, it came out that the said Jisha K. Joy had previously pledged 'gold ornaments' on eleven occasions and all ornaments were tested and all the pledged items were found to be spurious gold and on that basis, information was furnished to the police and Crime No.1260/2010 was registered. After investigation, the police laid charge sheet against the said person, which has been taken on file by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pathanamthitta as C.C.50/2011. On enquiry, the petitioner found out that the investigation was conducted in an illegal and irregular manner. Thus the petitioner moved an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate seeking to conduct further investigation in the case. However, by Ext.P3 order dt. 11.09.2013 the Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed the application and aggrieved by the same, the petitioner moved a Crl.M.C. before this Court. But relying on the decision in Amruthabhai Sambhubhai Patel v. Sambhubhai Kanthibhai Patel [2017 (1) KLT 707] on the premise that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that further investigation can be conducted only on the application of the Investigating Officer, the Crl.M.C. was dismissed leaving open the right of the petitioner to move a Writ Petition, if so advised. Thus he has moved this Writ Petition seeking to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, or order or direction commanding and compelling the 2^nd respondent and 3^rd respondents to consider Ext.P5 representation within a time frame and to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction commanding the 2^nd respondent to order further investigation in crime 1260/2010 of Pathanamthitta police station, since the final report filed before the Court is in violation of Section 219 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

2. The petitioner has enlisted numerous reasons justifying further investigation. According to him, even though twelve instances of cheating were committed by the said Jisha K. Joy within a period of twelve months, entire incidents have been brought