K. J. VAIDYA, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner - Madhubehn Pravinbhai Patel the bereaved elder sister of the deceased Pravina who allegedly came to be murdered by her husband Bhavesh and three other inmates of the house on account of the dowry demand not satisfied by her has by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India moved this Court inter alia praying for an immediate taking over of the investigation of C. R. No. 446/91 from the hands of Kagdapith Police Station Ahmedabad and to hand over the same to the Central Bureau of Investigation or any other independent investigating agency in substance alleging that right from the inception for the reasons unknown the investigation in the matter is being carried on illegally and dishonestly and accordingly if the same was permitted to be continued on the same pattern and in the hands of the same investigating agency serious miscarriage of justice was bound to result. ( 2 ) FEW relevant facts According to the petitioner who is also a complainant the deceased Pravina was her younger sister and was married to Bhavesh on 7-2-1987 and was residing in a joint family alongwith her husband sister-in-law and parents in-law in Bungalow No. 32 situated in Navyug Colony Bhulabhai Park Ahmedabad Further according to the petitioner Pravina was given sufficient amount of dowry at the time of her marriage as claimed by her in-laws The list of various items including silver and gold ornaments has been given in Annexure-A to the petition According to the petitioner the married life of Pravina was quite disturbed In fact whenever the deceased used to meet her she was complaining about the cruelties meted out to her by her in-laws for bringing less dowry Further according to the petitioner the day on which i. e. 7 Pravina died she was called by her in-laws Immediately accompanied by her mother-in-law Gomtibehn father-in-law Jashubhai and brothel-in-law Prafulbhai she at once rushed to the house of Pravina where her dead body was found lying in the guest-room on making inquiry the petitioner was informed by the in-laws of Pravina that she had committed suicide by tying herself with a saree on the ceiling fan. Looking to the circumstances the petitioner not feeling satisfied with the information given by the in-laws made at once a grievance that without calling the police why the dead body was dismounted from the fan ? None present in the house replied to this question and it was quite obvious that the death of Pravina was not a simple case of suicide but was that of murder and her in-laws were trying to twist and turn and give a colour of suicide to the death of Pravina in order to screen and protect themselves from the punishment of murder. It is further alleged by the petitioner that at the relevant time her father-in-law Jashubhai was also present at the house of the deceased and he too stated to suspect the same Jashubhai in fact accordingly reported himself before the police authority and expressed before it his suspicion that the death of Pravina was homicidal and not a suicidal and despite this the police strangely turned down his request to record the complaint at his instance and instead insisted upon the petitioner to file a complaint It is further alleged by the petitioner that though she had also stated before the police authority that the death of Pravina was homicidal the police surprizingly preferred to tone it down as a suicidal death on account of the dowry dispute and quarrels. According to the petitioner some of the averments found in the complaint though were not made by her were sought to be put in her mouth e. g. she has never stated that Pravina was tired from her life and had committed suicide on account of the cruelty on the part of her in-laws It has been further categorically asserted by the petitioner that while giving information before the police authority she had expressed strong suspicion to the effect that Pravina had met with homicidal death and was murdered and yet the investigating officer for the reasons best known to him and preferred to take down the complaint in the way and manner as the police wanted it to be recorded and registered the same as C. R. No. 446/91. 2. 2. 1 According to the petitioner on 8-10-1991 i. e. immediately on the next day of the incident one Kajlabehn Patwa Secretary of Jyotisangh a leading women organisation of Ahmedabad had given an application to the Police Inspector Kagdapith Police Station requesting him to make an in-depth investigation on the suspicious death of Pravina. The verbatim text of the said application in Gujarati is reproduced as under : 2. 2 Not only that but on the very day both Kajalbehn Patwa and Kokilabehn Shah visited and interrogated the neighbours residing near the house of the deceased and prepared a report duly signed by the residents of the area namely Bhavnabehn Dineshbhai K. K. Mehta Shah M. M. Suryabala Dashrathbhai and Jyotsnabehn Suryaprasad Raval The verbatim text of the said report is as under 2. 3 According to petitioner the aforesaid facts were conveyed to her father Patel Mavjibhai Kalyanbhai who came from Jamnagar on receiving the news of death of Pravina Accordingly on 16 said Mavjibhai Kalyanbhai Patel addressed an application dated 16-10-1991 to the Chief Minister wherein it was alleged that though his daughter Pravina was murdered by her husband and in-laws of the house the police has refused to register their complaint for the alleged offence of murder and instead by twisting the facts registered the complaint that Pravina had committed suicide due to cruelties and dowry demands The verbatim text of the said application is as under 2. 4 It is further alleged by the petitioner that since despite the written application dated 16 and the representation made to the Chief Minister and also the request made by Jyotisangh to the investigating officer to deeply investigate the suspected homicidal death of Pravina the same failed to invoke any response she under the agonizing circumstances of on the one hand losing her sister who was murdered and on the other hand both the police and higher-ups in the administration were turning deaf ears to the prayer for justice she was constrained to move this Court by presenting this petition. ( 3 ) MR. Bhargav Bhatt the Ld. ( 3 ) MR. Bhargav Bhatt the Ld. Advocate for the petitioner succinctly summarising the facts of the case has streamlined and highlighted the following tell-tale circumstances challenging the suicidal theory put forward by the police against the alleged homicidal death of Pravina in his efforts to prima facie show that the investigation carried out in this case was utterly dishonest and illegal They are (i) That the deceased Pravina had a married life of only four years and had a daughter of about an year (ii) That she died an unnatural death at the house of her in-laws (iii) That prima facie there are definite allegations on the record against the husband and the in-laws of the house-that they were subjecting the deceased Pravina to cruelties on the ground of having brought less dowry (iv) That immediately on receiving the news of the death of Pravina when the petitioner and her father reached the house of the deceased they at once suspected the foul death (v) That both the petitioner and her father had immediately reported this suspicion to the police authority that they suspected a foul murder and wanted to file FIR but the police officers for the reasons best known refused to record it. (vi) That thereafter even while agreeing to record FIR instead of recording the same of her father the police officer insisted for recording the same of the petitioner (vii) That even while recording the FIR of the petitioner the same was not taken down in her words and as per the story given by her instead surprisingly the story of suicidal death on account of dowry which was not her case came to be recorded (viii) That immediately on the next day of the incident i. e. on 8-10-1991 the office bearers of the Jyotisangh a leading women organisation of Ahmedabad has prepared the report on the basis of the interrogations and signatures of the neighbours of deceased Pravina alleging foul death of deceased Pravina. (ix) That thereafter the father of the petitioner had made a detail application dated 16-10-1991 as well as oral representation to the Chief Minister alleging that though prima facie foul murder of Pravina at the hands of the husband and the in-laws of the house had taken place the police has refused to investigate on that line It was accordingly requested that the investigation in the matter be carried on by independent agency like C. I. D. (Crimes ). (x) That at no point of time the deceased Pravina was ever seen in a melancholy mood to commit suicide or had ever expressed the same before the petitioner who was nearest to her (xi) That no mother who has just a sulking daughter to take care nurse nourish and rear up with all hopes to give her good fortune would easily succumb to the idea of committing suicide throwing the fate of most dearest minor child to dark and uncertain furture by throwing her away to the husband who may if once again remarries and thereby ultimately to the mercy of the stepmother On the contrary even for the sake of argument assuming that the deceased Pravina was fed up with her life and was thinking of ending the same by committing suicide she would not do the same as her worry and anxiety for the future of her sulking child would certainly counter-act and discourage her from executing that idea (xii) That in absence of any material indicative of the nature that Pravina was extremely tired and disgusted of her life it is too difficult at this stage to gulp down the theory of suicide (xiii) That there are no circumstances whatsoever remotely even suggestive of the fact that Pravina tied herself with saree hanging herself with a ceiling fan committing suicide In fact when Gomtibehn at the instance of police examined the body of deceased Pravina no injuries were found over her body Ordinarily in cases of suicide by strangulation eyes and tongue would be portruding out The froth from the mouth would also be coming out Still however in the instant case on seeing the photographs the theory of self-strangulation at once loses all its credibility. (xiv) That not only that but if indeed Pravina had ended her life by hanging herself on a ceiling fan then in that case the wings of the fan or the central rod holding the fan fixed in ceiling would to some extent must have been strached scratched twisted or damaged because of the dead-weight of the hanging corpse of Pravina. This is not found Had indeed the death been suicidal as alleged to have taken place then in that case the investigating officer would surely not have failed to make the Panchnama in the said regard (xv) That had indeed this been a case of suicide by hanging herself on a ceiling fan inmates of the house would not have dismounted the dead-body of the deceased Pravina before the arrival of the police (xvi) That ordinarily in early cool hours of the morning nobody commits suicide Mr. Bhatt submitted that despite the aforesaid glaring and weighty circumstances quite surprisingly not only the same did not click the investigating agency to record the case of homicidal death but rather quite shockingly it refused in the first instance to record the FIR of the father of the petitioner and thereafter even while recording the same of the petitioner the same came to be recorded on twisted facts Mr. Bhatt further submitted that if such a blatant and dishonest investigation in the case of dowry death can be dared in a city like Ahmedabad one shudders to think as to what would be happening in the remote villages amidst illiterate tongue-tied helpness masses ? Mr. Bhatt finally submitted that taking into consideration gruesome facts of the case not only the investigation should be handed over to an investigating agency like C B I but the illegal and dishonest investigation of the case made by the present investigating agency must be reported to the State Government for appropriate legal action. ( 4 ) AS against the above Mr. Trivedi Ld. P. P. has submitted an affidavit filed by Mr. ( 4 ) AS against the above Mr. Trivedi Ld. P. P. has submitted an affidavit filed by Mr. C. G. Patel Superintendent of Police D Division Ahmedabad City categorically denying each and every allegations levelled by the petitioner against the investigating agency It is emphatically affirmed by the deponent that the investigation in this case is carried out as honestly sincerely efficiently and legally as it can be expected of any honest sincere and conscientious investigating officer It is further stated in the said affidavit that the Government has constantly monitored the progress of the investigation of this case even from a period prior to the application dated 16-10-91 addressed to the Chief Minister On the basis of the aforesaid submissions it was finally contended by the Ld. P. P. that the allegations levelled against the investigating agency as well as the office of Chief Minister were patently irresponsible and baseless and the same have been made only with a view to prejudice the Court and obtain desired order from the Court. ( 5 ) NOW the above affidavit in reply filed by the investigating officer has been further sought to be met by the petitioner who has filed affidavit-in-rejoinder While adhering to the allegations already made against the investigating agency in the petition in rejoinder it is further alleged that the investigating agency has failed to preserve vicera thereby destroying the medical evidence The petitioner has also annexed one more affidavit in support of her case filed by one Dinita R. Shah. ( 6 ) NOW at the very outset it may be stated that the allegations made by the petitioner which in turn came to be streamlined and highlighted by Mr. Bhatt in para 3 of the judgment prima facie are quite eloquent and serious enough to be ignored or risked to be lightly brushed aside save and except at the cost of the Interests of justice If the allegations are true then they are too serious to be taken lightly. Bhatt in para 3 of the judgment prima facie are quite eloquent and serious enough to be ignored or risked to be lightly brushed aside save and except at the cost of the Interests of justice If the allegations are true then they are too serious to be taken lightly. Any way this is a matter for the State Government and the department to persue and consider and for the petitioner to follow up by way of legal action against the officers if she so desires As far as this Court is concerned at this stage prima facie it cannot be said that the circumstances highlighted by the petitioner have no substance at all After the commission of any offence during the course of investigation suspicion is the only and best guideline to put and keep the investigation on the right line Taking into consideration the circumstances indicated above it is not possible to deny that they did not raise the finger of suspicion against the husband and the in-laws of the house as the murderer of deceased Pravina The matter unfortunately does not rest here only as there are serious allegations of dishonesty illegality and dereliction of duty against the investigating agency conducting the investigation of the present case These allegations are made right from the day the investigation started To make such serious allegations and that too against the senior police officers is not a joke Not that whenever some allegations are made against the police officers they are always true But at the same time the same cannot be rejected straightway without inquiring into it Under such circumstances it is always desirable that interest of justice can only be better served if the investigation is handed over to some other independent investigating agency It may be clarified that when this Court says that there is some prima facie substance in the allegations made by the petitioner it does not for a moment even wants to say and suggest that it was accepting the case of the petitioner to the effect that the alleged death of Pravina was a case of homicidal death and not suicidal one At this juncture this Court is certainly not at that stage to decide it conclusively This can be done only by an appropriate Court at an appropriate time of trial on the basis of appropriate investigation-material produced and the witnesses examined in support of the allegation before the Court In fact when this Court at this stage says that there is some prima facie case what it broadly says and means is that looking to the attending circumstances of the case and seriousness of allegation it would not be desirable to continue the investigation in the hands of the present investigating agency in the larger interests of justice Further by directing the investigation to be handed over to other independent investigating agency-remotely even if this Court was committing some error even then such an error would be on a safer side because what ought this Court know that in case the allegations are true and ultimately found to be true what remedy then would be lie in our hands to redress the grievance and injustice of the aggrieved petitioner ? At this stage the Ld. P. P. requested this court not to enter into detail discussion as the State Government as well as the investigation agency has no objection if the investigation is taken away from the present investigating agency and handed over to the CID (Crimes) Even the investigating officer Mr. Patel who has filed reply affidavit denying the allegations levelled against the investigating agency has fairly stated that he has no objection if the investigation is handed over to any other independent investigating agency as desired by the petitioner At this stage Mr. Bhatt Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submitted that it would be highly desirable and in the interests of justice if the investigation is handed over to CBI rather than CID (Crimes) This submission of Mr. Bhatt was seriously objected to by Mr. Trivedi Ld. P. P. contending that Mr. Bhatt was unnecessarily insisting upon handing over the investigation to CBI as CBI was too busy with other investigation of important cases Now it is simply difficult to understand the particular stand of the Ld. P. P. particularly when the State Government has shown abundant grace and fairness in conceding that the investigation of the present case my be taken away from the present investigating agency and handed over to other independent agency It appears to this Court that in such types of cases like the present one as far as possible it is always advisable for the State Government to entrust the investigation to C. B. I. Anyway taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be better served if the investigation in this case is handed over to the CBI Ahmedabad. ( 7 ) NOW before this judgment can rest concluded three important aspects which have surfaced the proceedings during the course of hearing of this petition indeed need the special mention and direction They are (i) the concerned investigating agency against which some serious allegations of dishonest and illegal investigation are made and further still though on the basis of which only the relief of changing the hands of the investigating agency are prayed for the same quite strangely and surprisingly is not specifically impleaded as a party to these proceedings; (ii) Mr. D. K. Trivedi the learned PP appearing for the respondent-State and other two respondents viz. D. I. G. and IGP (CID Crimes) Ahmedabad has also appeared for the delinquent investigating agency (!); (iii) the serious greievance voiced by the petitioner to the effect that despite the written and oral representation made to the Chief Minister protesting and complaining against the alleged dishonest and illegal investigation carried on by the investigating officer and that too in dowry murder case requesting him to order investigation by independent investigating agency like CID Crimes no heed apparently paid to the same as evident from the fact that till this date she has not been communicated either orally or in writing anything as to what actual steps actions were taken by the State Government pursuant to the aforesaid complaint. 7. 1 Now incidentally since the appreciation of the aforesaid first two aspects to certain extent mutually overlap each other they are accordingly discussed simultaneously as under : 7. 2 The first and the second aspect: Indisputably the present petition is essentially and specifically directed against the illegal and dishonest investigation carried on by the investigating officer of Kagdapith Police Station Ahmedabad and further on the basis of the same only transfer of the investigation to any other independent investigating agency is prayed for and yet quite surprisingly it is not joined as a party This position is indeed difficult to understand It is of course true that the petitioner has joined the State and other two respondents as parties It is also true that right from the beginning Mr. Trivedi the learned PP for the State has also appeared on behalf of all the respondents and the investigating agency as well by tendering the affidavit-in-reply and making submission on its behalf Now in such types of cases in the writ petitions the practice of the learned PP to have a common appearance on behalf of the State D. G. P. Special I. G. P. and also on behalf of the delinquent investigating officer does not appear to a proper practice. The reasons for this are twofolds viz. The reasons for this are twofolds viz. (1) At this prime stage on the one hand of the pending investigation of a Criminal case and on the other hand pending complaint of illegal and dishonest investigating against the delinquent investigating officer himself it is too early for the State to blindly and mechanically endorse and defend the alleged mis-deeds of the I. O. for what ought we know the State Government in a given case may not support the delinquent I. O. or in any other case reserves its right to decide the same at appropriate stage after the departmental inquiry is over and/or is of the view of handing over investigating agency As against this the possibility of the investigating agency having its own say against it These two situations are absolutely irreconcilable and therefore a common PP cannot serve the two ends at a time Now if the State Government and other Head of the Police Department at this stage were to rush up and support the delinquent investigation officer wherein the allegations made by the petitioner party are yet to be examined and considered by them giving the petitioner party an opportunity to prove the same it may indeed create a very embarrassing situation for them in case subsequently some decision is taken for departmental inquiry and action is proposed initiated or taken against such delinquent officer Examining the case from this angle also better discretion warrants that the State and other respondents should adopt a policy of wait and see and let the concerned I. O. who is primarily accountable appear reply and defend the allegations made against him It is quite understandable that in some Criminal-Appeals Revisions Misc. Criminal Applications etc. Criminal Applications etc. where the trial and investigation of the cases are over and if in such matters if the investigation of the case come under attack the learned PP appearing for the State can certainly make appropriate submissions and if the need be even defending the delinquent investigating agency But that is not the case here Here the allegation of dishonest illegal and mala fide investigation are personal one against the investigating officer right from the initial stage of the investigating regarding which a complaint/representation is already made to the Chief Minister which only the concerned investigating officer is in a position to take care and defend When this Court says that the learned PP should not appear for the investigating officer it only means that the learned PP appearing for the State should not appear also for the investigating officer Thats all. If in a given case the investigating officer through the good offices of the Home Department and the Legal Department gets permission to be defended by any of the PP or APP of the State such PP/app can appear and defend the said delinquent officer (2) Further in cases wherein the petition is based on serious allegations of dishonest and illegal investigation against any particular investigating agency and as consequential relief thereto of transfer of the investigation of the case to some other independent agency is sought for it is the duty of the petitioner to invariably make the concerned investigating agency a party to the proceedings It is too well known a principle that when some definite allegations are levelled against any person party or agency and ultimately on the basis of the same only a specific relief is sought for from the court such a party is invariably and inevitably the first and foremost necessary party without hearing which relief apart-even the petition may not be entertained Thus merely joining the State and other two respondents as parties to this writ petition by itself is not a sufficient compliance in such cases Further none can be permitted to be oblivious to the fact not even the court (Emphasis supplied ) that the investigation is a statutory right of the police and by no means it can be lightly triffled with save and except for the compelling reasons of in the interest of justice and/or to prevent the miscarriage of justice and that too after affording a reasonable opportunity to the delinquent investigating officer to appear reply and defend his case in his own statutory right Accordingly coming to the facts of this case fortunately the investigating officer was good enough to attend the court on all dates of the hearing Not only that but in his affidavit-in-reply while denying the allegations against him has gracefully submitted to the court that he has no objection if the investigation was handed over to the any other investigating agency Thus the order which ultimately this Court is going to pass is passed after fully hearing the investigating officer himself It appears that very likely because the petitioner committed an error in not specifically impleading the investigating officer as a necessary party to the proceedings the said error inadvertently came to be continued further by the learned PP. Anyway the observations made hereinabove are only with a view to see that henceforth the care may be taken in order to avoid embarrassing situation as discussed above 7. 3 Third aspect: In this petition the real heart-burning of the petitioner is the fact that despite written application and oral representation made to the Chief Minister complaining against illegal and dishonest investigation and for that purpose requesting him to hand over the same to some other independent investigating agency nothing came to be communicated to her indicating as to what steps/actions etc. were taken or were under contemplation of the Government and that it is only because of this that the petitioner has been constrained to knock the doors of this Court by filing this writ petition Now if indeed this grievance of the petitioner is true (and must be treated to be true as the same has not been controverted by the learned PP by producing any tangible material contrary to the same) it is indeed a very sad story reflecting upon the public administration In this regard of course the learned PP has very vehemently submitted that immediately after the incident and even prior to the above application the State Government has at once stepped into action by taking necessary steps monitoring the investigation of the case from time to time and in this view of the matter the allegations levelled against the office of the Chief Minister were not only baseless and irresponsible but were mala fide and mischievous and therefore the same should not be taken into consideration. At this stage this Court to certain extent may not doubt the statement of the learned PP made at the Bar still however even if the said submission of the learned PP is to be accepted that by itself may be good only but only good is not always enough Further looking to the gravity and seriousness of the allegations against the investigating agency if indeed the State was monitoring the investigation of the case how the request regarding the change of hand of the investigation by the application dated 16 did not catch the eyes of the authorities to do the needful ? As a matter of fact in over all public interest it needs to be very much stated that when any bereaved bewildered and broken down family member or any other relative of the deceased woman who has been murdered by her husband and the in-laws of the house and became one more victim adding to the long list of the dowry deaths in the State and further still to top it and aggravate the said situation if the complaint is made against the investigating officer alleging dereliction of duty dishonest and illegal investigation by any such aggrieved citizen to the authority who is no less than the Chief Minister of the State same cannot be cursorily treated. In fact moment such complaints are received by the Chief Minister the same should be attended to with the utmost sense of responsibility and accordingly as a follow-up action first of all the applicant must be informed (i) Whether his/her grievance is attended to or the same was filed ? (ii) If attended to at what stage of consideration the same was ? and/or (iii) What steps were or were being taken from time to time ? This sort of ordinary quite human considerate sympathetic and prompt written response to any aggrieved citizen is always a matter of great solace and a morale booster to him and the hope and aspiration of the people in the Governments public oriented administration. Further such an efficient human response is the first and foremost guiding principle and a step for any people oriented public administration wedded to the Rule of Law. In fact it is only when such much needed communication is received by the aggrieved citizen that he can decide and chalk-out his future course of action to get justice. When a citizen alleges darkness and actually cries and clamours for the light to dispel the said darkness by way of an information and action and approaches the concerned authorities such of his vital right to light cannot be met with the cold shoulder in a democratic set-up of Government by just taking some unilateral action and subsequently saying that the State was monitoring the alleged illegal and dishonest investigation. Assuming even if some oral assurance was given at the time of written application or oral representation thereafter even about a month has passed without any apprarent result. Assuming even if some oral assurance was given at the time of written application or oral representation thereafter even about a month has passed without any apprarent result. Secondly the very contents and nature of the application in question made to the Chief Minister is in the form of a complaint against the investigating agency. With great respect it may be stated that moment such complaints are received by the Chief Minister looking to the high and just expectations of the people in him for efficient honest and straighforward people oriented administration it was his duty to forward the same to the D. G. P. Gujarat State who is in his turn must refer it to a Special Vigilance Cell working under him to make necessary inquiry in the grievance of the citizen and report back so that the appropriate action can be taken against the delinquent officer by State failing which the aggrieved citizen may explore and resort to some other legal remedies of his own. It has not been pointed out to us that any such thing has been done in the matter. Mind well the grievance made by the petitioner is in respect firstly of a dowry murder case and secondly is the allegation that the investigating agency was carrying on the investigation illegally and dishonestly. (Emphasis supplied.) One should not forget that for an ordinary citizen to make a complaint against the investigating officer is not a joke. At the same time this Court is equally conscious and alive to the misfortune of some of those law-abiding honest sincere and conscientious police officers who day in and day out are the victim of some baseless and irresponsible allegations made against them by some interested unscrupulous elements. This Court is further equally conscious of the fact that the task and duly of the police is indeed a thankless job and is always a subject-matter of some right or wrong criticism and therefore such police officers indeed deserve to be duly protected as not to do so will have a serious demoralising effect on them ultimately damaging the very public interest. But at the same time when such serious allegations are made same also cannot be lightly treated and blindly turned down without looking into it and verifying the same as otherwise doing so it is likely some serious miscarriage of justice may result. But at the same time when such serious allegations are made same also cannot be lightly treated and blindly turned down without looking into it and verifying the same as otherwise doing so it is likely some serious miscarriage of justice may result. Not only that but not taking into consideration such serious complaints against the police officer may in a given case give some undesirable handle to some dishonest police officer to carry and perpetuate further his dishonest and illegal investigation with impunity which may ultimately seriously challenge and undermine the very existence of the system of Rule of Law in the State opening the flood-gate of the Rule of lawlessness in the society Thus examining the case from any angle in such types of cases where some serious allegations are levelled against the investigating agency neither the authorities are expected to be governed by the prejudices against the police and straightway take action upon it nor it would be safe and advisable for it to mechanically dismiss the same without properly scrutinizing and inquiring into the same Such applications are always required to be examined dispassionately on the merits It has got to be remembered that right of being informed by the prompt communication and more particularly in such types of serious cases is one of the most basic and important sight of any aggrieved citizen and therefore the same cannot be ignored. Fulfilment of such rights indeed accords with the satisfaction of the aggrieved applicant that he/she is heard responded cared and helped by the State Not only that but the same further strengthens and consolidates the faith of the citizen in public administration of Government This confidence and the faith of the people in the people oriented efficient responsible public administration is one of the most important constituents and safeguard of the successful system of Rule of Law In order to have such a happy healthy image of the public administration a special care is required to be taken at all levels of the Government Departments The authorities accordingly will have to see that the aggrieved applicant is promptly attended to informed and posted with necessary information from time to time if possible This is all the more necessary particularly in cases wherein the serious complaints are made against the public servants regarding their inaction inefficiency corruption etc. as well as in cases of atrocities on women members of S. C. and S. T. any other weaker section of the society and such dowry deaths In every such matters every aggrieved citizen has certainly a right to know what steps are taken by the State Government because as we know that in criminal cases a citizen individually has no locus to launch prosecution and conduct the trial and therefore if the State does not throw any light at such a crucial juncture he/she would be gropping in darkness without any remedy Further even otherwise some time written response to the aggrieved citizen is also advisable from the standpoint of the overall interest of the public administration itself in order to ensure against some false frivolous and vexatious allegations which are not uncommon to be flunged at these days it may be clarified that there indeed can never be any doubt about the fact that the Chief Minister personally may not always be expected or asked to be responsible for any such lapses or carelessness in attending the complaint as actue pressure of multiple public duties on him is quite understandable more particularly when his attention is specifically not drawn to the grievances made in the complaint. But at the same time the secretarial of the Chief Minister needs to be specially made aware alert and vigilant about its public oriented duly and ultimate accontability in cases of serious complaints listed above 7. 4 It is earnestly hoped that whatever has been observed in the highest public interest will be taken in the same right spirit and accordingly will be appreciated and implemented for the purpose and goal for which all the three viz. Legislature Executive and Judiciary stand committed to. 7. 5 Mr. D. K. Trivedi the learned PP is directed to bring to the notice of the Chief Secretary to the Government of Gujarat Gandhinagar the observations made by this Court in para 7. 1 to 7. 4 of this judgment for appropriate consideration and necessary action. ( 8 ) IN the result this petition is allowed and accordingly it is ordered that1 The investigation of CR No. 446/91 so far conducted by Kagdapith Police Station Ahmedabad shall from this hours onwards i. e. (19-12-1991 12 Noon) shall be handed over to the CBI which shall re-investigate the case. ( 8 ) IN the result this petition is allowed and accordingly it is ordered that1 The investigation of CR No. 446/91 so far conducted by Kagdapith Police Station Ahmedabad shall from this hours onwards i. e. (19-12-1991 12 Noon) shall be handed over to the CBI which shall re-investigate the case. Having regard to the effect that the statutory stipulated period of filing the charge-sheet would be over on or before 4-1-1992 the CBI is directed to conduct the investigation as expeditiously as possible keeping in mind the consequences of crossing the statutory period of filing the charge-sheet. 2 That the Investigation Officer of Kagdapith Police Station Ahmedabad is further directed to hand over the entire record of the investigation carried out by him till today containing various statements of witnesses photographs documents/records if any including the case diary so as to facilitate the officers of CBI with further investigation of the case. 3 That the Registrar of this Court is directed to at once take possession of the entire aforesaid record of the investigation (as referred to in clause-2 above) from the IO Kagdapith Police Station Ahmedabad and keep the same in his custody under the seal of the Court and then to deliver the same to the responsible officers of CBI who shall be called at once to this Court to take possession of the aforesaid record. 4 That the Registrar is further directed to take out four xerox copies of each and every document that may be submitted by the IO and shall deliver the one set of the same to the concerned officer. After the aforesaid order was passed Mr. B. B. Naik the learned Advocate for respondent No. 4 has appeared alongwith the Deputy Superintendent of Police CBI Ahmedabad and that he was handed over the possession of the investigation papers in question. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent. (N. V. A.) Order accordingly. .