Rohini V. Nair vs Inspector General of Police, Superintendent of Police and Sub Inspector of Police

Thomas P. Joseph, J.—Petitioner''s husband, a fireman was electrocuted while on duty and in connection with that, the Peramangalam police registered Crime No. 104 of 2011. Grievance of petitioner is that the third respondent is not conducting investigation in a proper manner and has already deleted two of the prime accused. The Assistant Divisional Officer, Fire and Safety Department preferred Ext.P4 and petitioner preferred Ext.P5, representations to the Superintendent of Police, Thrissur but, no action was taken so far. Hence this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that respondent Nos. 1 and 2 may be directed to conduct proper investigation into the crime, direct second respondent to consider Ext.P5, representation in the light of Ext.P4, complaint and provide necessary instruction to his subordinates. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also.

If Exts.P4 and P5, representations are received by the second respondent and if not already disposed of, the same are to be disposed of as provided under law. Second respondent is directed to do so.

Resultantly this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent (Superintendent of Police, Thrissur) to dispose of Exts.P4 and P5, (if it is received by him and not so far disposed of) as provided under law as early as possible.