AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Sasidharan Nambiar, J.—This petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of Indian by the complainant in C.M.P. No. 5461/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate''s court-I, Attingal for a writ of mandamus to consider Exhibit P3 request of the Petitioner to grant sanction to prosecute accused 1 and 3 contending that his request was not considered and by Exhibit P4 order, sanction was granted to prosecute the second accused alone, without considering his request to prosecute accused 1 and 3 also.
Deputy superintendent of Police, Attingal filed a statement showing the details of the enquiry conducted on getting Exhibit P3 petition for sanction. Copy of the report submitted on enquiry as well as the materials were also produced.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Government Pleader were heard.
By Exhibit P3, Petitioner sought sanction to prosecute accused 1 to 3. By Exhibit P4 order, sanction was granted to prosecute the second accused, Assistant Sub Inspector of Police finding that alleged acts of Additional Sub Inspector were not part of discharge of his official duty. Exhibit P4 order also does not show the authority to grant sanction and considered the request to grant sanction to prosecute accused 1 and 3. It is on that basis, this writ petition is filed. Though the statement filed by Deputy Superintendent of Police with the materials produced show that the question of granting sanction to prosecute accused 1 and 3 were also considered, Exhibit P4 order does not show either that it was considered or rejected.
In such circumstances, petition is disposed directing first Respondent to consider Exhibit P3 request to prosecute accused 1 and 3 and intimate the decision to the Petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.