Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, J
PAUL KOKKAT, – Appellant
Versus
THE DIRECTOR OF VIGILANCE – Respondent
WP(C)/2251/2020
Mandamus - Writ Petition - Sections 2, 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - Court directed completion of investigation and filing of report.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a complainant, sought a writ mandamus to compel the investigating officer to finalize an investigation into a 2016 FIR, alleging undue delay in report submission.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the investigation was reported completed in March 2020 but no final report was filed. It ordered timely completion of report verification and submission.
Issues: Whether to issue a mandamus to compel the completion of the investigation and the filing of a final report.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that mandamus can be used to compel statutory duties, ensuring timely justice.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of with directions to complete the investigation and file a report within two months.
JUDGMENT
The prayers made in this writ petition are as follows:
“i. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to finalize the investigation on the basis of registration of Ext.P2 crime and inform the finalization of the investigation to the petitioner, within such time as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
ii. Issue such other orders, writs or directions as are deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.
iii. Award cost of this proceedings to the petitioner.”
2. The petitioner is the de facto complainant in the case registered as per Ext.P2 F.I.R. His grievance is that inspite of the fact that the case was registered in the year 2016, the investigating officer has not so far completed the investigation of the case and filed final report in the competent court.
3. The investigating officer had filed a report as early as on
12.03.2020 that the investigation of the case has been completed and factual report has been submitted to the Director, VACB for scrutiny and that on receipt of the scrutiny report, final report will be filed in the competent court.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. Inspite of a report filed in this writ petition as early as on
12.03.2020 that the investigation of the case has been completed and factual report has been submitted to the Director, VACB, no final report has been yet filed in the competent court. In such a situation, I find that it is only proper to give a direction to the first and the second respondents to complete the verification or scrutiny of the factual report and to file final report within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, a period of two months would be sufficient to do so.
6. In the result, the first respondent is directed to complete the scrutiny of the factual report submitted by the investigating officer at the earliest so as to enable the investigating officer to file final report within a period of two months from today. Thereafter, the investigating officer shall file final report in the competent court within a period of two months from today. The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/- R. NARAYANA PISHARADI JUDGE lsn APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2251/2020 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COURT OF ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL JUDGE THRISSUR IN CRL.M.P. NO. 876/2016 DATED
19.7.2016.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO. 39/2016/TSR OF THE OFFICE OF VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU THRISSUR.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF SIDCO DATED
11.04.2017.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE LSN
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
