Inadequate police investigation claims do not justify direct High Court intervention when alternative remedies are available.

K.BABU, J.

--------------------------------------

W.P (Crl) No.1361 of 2025 ---------------------------------------

Dated this the 4^th day of February, 2026 JUDGMENT The prayers in this Writ Petition (Criminal) filed under Article

226 of the Constitution of India are as follows:

“i. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 1^st respondent to conduct a fair, impartial and time-bound further investigation in crime no.132/2019 of the West Police Station, Kollam;

ii. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 1^st respondent to constitute a Special Investigation Team to investigate the crime No.132/2019 registered in the West Police Station, Kollam;

iii. Pass any other order(s) or direction(s) as may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.”

2. The petitioner is the defacto complainant in C.C No.138/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Kollam. The offences alleged against the accused in the case are punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(1) and 34 of the IPC.

The relevant facts:

3. The petitioner filed Guardian and Wards OP No.1422/2017 before the Family Court, Kollam, for getting custody of his minor son. His wife is no more. His son was in the custody of his father- in-law. On 07.09.2018, the petitioner, his father-in-law and his brother-in-law were present on the premises of the Family Court. While handing over of the child, a scuffle occurred between the parties. The petitioner sustained injuries.

3.1. The petitioner filed a complaint alleging offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(1) and 34 of the IPC before the West Police station, Kollam arraying respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6 as accused. The Police conducted investigation and submitted final report. In the final report, the Police arrayed respondent Nos.4 and 5 as accused. The other persons arrayed as accused were deleted from the array of the accused in the final report. The Police submitted the final report as early as on 16.02.2019. On 06.03.2019, the petitioner filed a complaint before the Director General of Police alleging that there is discrepancy in the investigation. In the complaint, he further alleged that since respondent No.6 was a Police Officer the Investigating agency deleted him under his influence. Thereafter on 23.11.2019, the petitioner submitted a complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Kollam raising the allegations referred to above. He had also submitted a complaint before the Chief Minister. The authorities concerned conducted inquiry into the allegations levelled in Exts.P16 and P18 complaints filed by the complainant and closed them.

4. Now the petitioner seeks a direction to conduct further investigation in the matter.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the investigation was an absolute sham. The learned counsel further submitted that the statement of the petitioner was altered. The learned counsel also submitted that the Police recorded incorrect statements under Section 161 Cr.PC. The learned counsel for the petitioner further stated that there was inordinate delay in recording the statement of the petitioner.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor countered and submitted that the Police conducted fair and proper investigation in the matter. The higher authorities in the Police, based on the complaints submitted by the petitioner, conducted enquiry and came to the conclusion that the allegations are false.

8. The Investigating Officer submit