Shri.Parameshwaran v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION [CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ******** PRESENT: HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY HATTACHARYYA HON'BLE JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL) MAT/37/2025 Shri. Parameshwaran ... Appellant
Versus
The Andaman & Nicobar Administration and Others ... Respondents For the Appellant : Mr. KMB Jayapal For the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : Ms. Babita Das For the Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Sumit Kumar Karmakar Heard on : 16.12.2025 Judgment on : 22.12.2025 SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
1.
The appeal has been preferred challenging the impugned order dated 13th day of June, 2025 passed in WPA. No. 41 of 2025 (Shri Parameshwaran -vs- The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Others) by learned Single Judge of the High Court at Calcutta Circuit Bench at Port Blair. 2.
The grounds for appeal are as follows :- i) The learned Single Judge erred in law holding that place of inquest in the present case was proper.
ii) That while preparing inquest report by the Executive Magistrate, South-Andaman on 12.02.2024 of deceased daughter of appellant herein/ writ petitioner there is no recording of External injuries of deceased P. Ashikaa rather it records as 'normal' whereas in the Post Mortem held and conducted Dr Arpan Kumar Pan, M.D, a Senior Resident, Department of Forensic Science, ANIIMS, Port Blair it has been found that there is Epiglottis Multiple Petechial Hemorrhages present and there is mucosa Congested which ipso fact draw conclusion that the Inquest report dated 12.02.2024 by the Executive Magistrate, South-Andaman has been prepared in perfunctory manner to shield the real culprit.
iii) The learned Single Judge also failed to appreciate that no proper enquiry has been held and conducted by respondent No. 3 in respect of the appellant's daughter's unnatural death.
iv) The Single Bench failed to consider the perfunctory manner in which the inquiry and investigation was conducted by the respondent No.3 who also failed to hold inquiry by calling for call details of Smt. Shanti for the period from 11.02.2024 till 13.02.2024 as it is her
version that she called the deceased daughter of the appellant herein on 12.02.2024 at about 11:00 am and at that time deceased did not attend her call which prompted her to reach the spot, brake open the door of store room and she found P. Ashikaa hanging.
v) The judgment and order under challenge being not in accordance with law is liable to be set aside and a reinvestigation by an independent agency is to be ordered to prevent the abuse of process of law and also in the interest of justice.
3.
The learned Single Judge vide the impugned order dismissed the writ application on the findings as follows: "It has been further pressed into service by the learned Advocate for the petitioner that the Executive Magistrate failed to indicate any external injury as would be evident upon comparative analysis of the post mortem report and the inquest report. It would be pertinent to state at this juncture that the object of proceedings under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. is merely to ascertain whether a person is died under a suspicious circumstances or an unnatural death and if so what is the apparent cause of his death and note such wounds, fractures, bruises, and other marks of injury as may be found on the body. Therefore, the act of the Executive Magistrate in preparing the inquest report is limited to the scope as enumerated hereinabove.
The Executive Magistrate in his report, as has been rightly indicated by learned Advocate for respondent No. 1 and 2, has noted the external injury i.e. 'Broad and Oblique Ligature Mark' and the cause of death is due to hanging. The post mortem report also reveals that the cause of the death was due to asphyxia due to hanging and the injuries mentioned are ante-mortem in nature and consistent with hanging.
During investigation of the unnatural death case the investigating agency has examined parents, relatives and neighbour and recorded their statement. None of them, particularly the father who is a petitioner herein, has raised doubt or suspicion or made allegation against any person of foul play. The petitioner has also not raised any objection against the procedure of inquest and submission of final
report before any authority till filing of the writ petition after almost a year.
In light of the above discussion, the writ petition falls short of merit and is liable to be dismissed."
4.
On hearing the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the materials on record it appears that the appellant/ writ petitioner's daughter aged about 18 years was found hanging on 12.02.2025.
5.
On the same day inquest was conducted by the Executive Magistrate, South Andaman. On 12.02.2024 post-mortem was performed and on 11.06.2024 final report on completion of investigation was submitted by the investigating agency which ended in a FRT.
6.
On perusal of the relevant documents made part of the paper book it appears from the written complaint that the complainant stated as follows:- "On 11.02.24 at around 04 pm Eshwari's younger daughter P.Ashika came to her house and told her grandmother that in her family no one loves her and is upset for some reason regarding her brother's wife. Her mother Eshwari always uses to taunt her that her brother's wife is good and obedient and she is not. On this she came to her grandmother's home. Further, Anshika said that she will not write her board examination and will do some private work on which her grandmother asked her to study further and to attend computer course. Yesterday on 11.02.24 at around 09 pm she was on mobile with her friend and later she slept. On 12.02.
24 she woke up at 04 AM in the morning on which her grandmother asked her to sleep. Later at around 06 AM in the morning Smti. Shanti went for work at Dr. Izra madam's house, her younger daughter at around 08 AM went to Govt. Sr Sec School Prothrapur, her nice went for her work to Goenkhas at 09 AM. Anshika was alone in her residence. At around 11 AM Smti.
nice was hanging using a blue color saree which was tied with a rod. Later, a neighbor came for her help and they called an ambulance and rescued her to PHC Garacharma where at 0140 Hrs the duty doctor declared her dead."
7.
Final report was submitted on completion of inquiry in UD FIR No. 12 of 2024. The writ application was filed after one year of the incident. From the statements in the case diary of the writ petitioner/appellant and other witnesses recorded, there does not appear to be prima facie any foul play. 8.
On perusal of the inquest report there does not appear to be any external injury noted by Executive Magistrate and cause of death has been shown as "due to hanging". The post-mortem report also does not show any injury other than the one caused by the act of hanging. The cause of death in the postmortem report has been categorically noted as "Asphyxia due to hanging".
9.
The petitioner herein has prayed for reinvestigation. The Court can consider such prayer if the following grounds are found from the materials on record:- i) Flawed/Biased Investigation: If the original probe was tainted, unfair, or failed basic principles, leading to an unreliable outcome.
ii) New, Critical Evidence: Discovery of substantial new facts or evidence that fundamentally changes the case's understanding.
iii) Securing Justice: When the High Court or Supreme Court finds it necessary to ensure complete justice, overriding earlier findings or reports.
iv) Inadequate Initial Inquiry: When crucial aspects of the case were ignored or not properly considered by the first investigators.
10.
No such grounds has been made out in the present case and as such this Court finds no reason to order reinvestigation.
11.
Thus the investigation in the case was prima facie conducted in accordance with law and the learned Single Judge on proper findings, rightly dismissed the writ application. 12.
A point of maintainability has been raised regarding the writ application as the relief prayed for includes a prayer for reinvestigation by an independent agency and also the quashing of the final report filed by the investigating agency. It is submitted that the said relief as prayed for is subject to criminal revision.
13.
The learned advocate for the petitioner has relied upon an order passed in Division Bench of this Court dated 05.09.2011. It appears that the said proceedings was a Public Interest Litigation and is not similar to the facts and circumstances of the present case.
14.
Thus without going into the point of maintainability at this stage, on perusal of the materials on record and also the impugned order under challenge, the order of the learned Single Judge being in accordance with law, does not call for any interference by this Court.
15.
The appeal stands dismissed.
16.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, shall be supplied to the parties as expeditiously as possible, upon compliance of all formalities.
[SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.] I agree (HIRANMAY HATTACHARYYA, J.)