Radhakrishnan alias Vijayan vs State of Kerala and Others

Thomas P Joseph, J.—Petitioner''s son aged 14 years was found hanging in a nude position on a sari tied on a ceiling fan in the house of Petitioner on 30.05.2009 at about 11 a.m. Local police registered a case for unnatural death and the investigation was continued by the Dy. S.P. Narcotic Cell, Thiruvananthapuram Rural. Petitioner filed W.P(C). No. 22922 of 2009 for investigation by the 5th Respondent, the CBI. That writ petition was disposed of by this Court directing the Dy. S.P. Narcotic Cell to continue investigation. It is the grievance of Petitioner that there was no progress in the matter and that investigating officer is nursing his view that the deceased committed suicide. Learned Counsel submitted that there is no proper investigation of the case and that there is no reference to the chemical examination if any conducted on the beedi bud collected from the scene of occurrence. No investigation was conducted whether the beedi bud had saliva on it and whether it tallied with the saliva of the deceased or other inmate of the house to rule out the possibility of a stranger having his presence at the scene of occurrence at the relevant time. Learned Counsel requested that investigation may be handed over to the 5th Respondent, the CBI. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that investigation is being continued by the Dy. S.P. Narcotic Cell, Thiruvananthapuram, Rural and that there is no need to hand over investigation to any other agency. Learned Public Prosecutor has also referred me to the statement filed by investigating officer in that regard.

I have gone through the CD file given to me by learned Public Prosecutor for perusal. True, the medical officer who conducted postmortem examination on the body of the deceased has stated that there was no evidence of forcible suspension of the body of the deceased on the ligature. It is also tated that there was no evidence of presence of abrasion on any portion of body of the deceased so that any attempt for unnatural sex could be doubted.

According to the Petitioner, himself and wife had left the house on the morning of the fateful day leaving their two sons, Jishnu and Krishnu. Krishnu, the younger son left the house at about 10.20a.m and returned by about 11.45 a.m. and on finding that the front door was closed, he moved to the rear side and saw a person jumping over the compound wall and running away. Peeping through the rear side of the house he found his elder brother, Krishnu hanging on the sari. His cry invited the local people.

It is pointed out by learned Public Prosecutor that the front and rear doors were locked from inside and the bunch of keys was seen inside the house. It is further submitted that the door was broke open in the presence of the local people. Learned Counsel for Petitioner replies that it was possible that rear door could be locked from outside as well. I am not going into those aspects of the matter. It is seen that at the time of inquest beedi bud and squibs were seized from the place of occurrence. It is not clear what exactly is the result of the chemical examination, if any conducted on the beedi bud, whether there was any attempt to identify whether there was saliva on the beedi bud and if so it tallied with that of the deceased or any other inmate of the house. If such an investigation was conducted and the saliva if any found on the beedi bud did not tally with the saliva of the deceased and other inmates of the house that would have indicated whether the saliva if any was that of any outsider. It appears that no investigation was conducted in that line. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, I consider that it is proper to direct the CBCID, Thiruvananthapuram to conduct further investigation of the case. But I do not consider it necessary that investigation has to be handed over to the CBI.

Resultantly this petition is allowed. The CBCID, Crime Branch, Thiruvananthapuram is directed to conduct further investigation of the case (Crime No. 285 of 2009 of Parasala Police Station). Necessary orders in that regard shall be issued by the ADGP, Crimes within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment which shall be made available by the Petitioner to that officer.