The court emphasized the necessity of a fair investigation by an independent agency in politically sensitive cases to uphold justice and public confidence, particularly in light of potential biases of local investigators.

JUDGMENT

Petitioners are the parents of deceased Shuhaib, who was hacked to death on a public road at 10.50 p.m. on 12.02.2018 by four or five persons, who were armed with lethal weapons appeared at the spot in a vehicle which exhibited a board, 'for registration'. The assailants rushed to the deceased, and among them indiscriminately hurled bombs at the spot by causing explosions with a view to avoiding interventions from the public. Swiftly, cuts were inflicted repeatedly on the deceased, and in fact he was butchered to death. Two persons, one Noushad and the first informant, who attempted to intervene for the rescue of the deceased, were also attacked and cuts were inflicted on them.

2. Ext.P1 FIS was recorded by the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police at 3.15 a.m. on 13.2.2018, on the basis of which, Crime No.202/2018 of the Mattannoor Police Station was registered at 4.54 a.m. on 13.02.2018 through Ext.P1(a) FIR.

3. According to the first informant, the murder of the deceased and the attempt to murder the informant as well as Noushad, were out of political enmity from CPI(M) activists, as a result of a criminal conspiracy.

4. According to the petitioners, they are deeply aggrieved by the lack of proper investigation. They have no case that the local police, who is conducting the investigation are inefficient to conduct a proper investigation. According to them, their hands are fettered since the persons behind the murder and the alleged conspirators behind the murder are attached to the ruling party. Further according to them, the first accused in the case, who was arrested on 18.02.2018 has close acquaintance with the top leaders of the Communist Marxist party of India. Some newspaper reports have also been produced with photographs.

5. It is the apprehension forwarded by the petitioners that in case the so-called investigation conducted by the local police is allowed to continue as such, day-by- day there is a chance of evidence is being destroyed, and in such case, the conspirators can take shelter without coming into light. Hence, they seek for an impartial investigation by the premium investigating agency of the country, the CBI. According to them, CBI alone can conduct an impartial investigation in the matter, as they are not amenable to the local police.

6. The learned State Attorney has vehemently opposed the writ petition on two grounds. The first ground is that a single Bench of this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain this writ petition, as the matter is covered by Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India , when the same has not been allocated to a Single Judge as per the Kerala High Court Act. The second argument is that on merits also, this writ petition will not lie.

7. According to the learned State Attorney, a proper and impartial investigation is being carried on by the local police by a Special Investigation Team constituted for the said purpose, under the direct supervision of the I.G. of Police, Kannur. It is argued that the members of the Special Investigation Team are efficient officers having unblemished service and they can conduct an impartial investigation. The learned State Attorney has made available before this Court the details of the investigation so far conducted, through the report prepared in a tabular form.

8. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, even though the first accused was placed under arrest on 18.02.2018 along with the 2^nd accused, and their custody was with the investigating team, they could not effect recovery of the weapons used by A1 and A2, with the aid