Judgment :- 1. Fairness in action is the manifestation of Rule of Law, which in turn, is recognized as a basic feature of the Constitution of India. Fair investigation into crimes and fair trial are concomitants of right to life, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which is considered to be the most precious rights of all citizens as well as non-citizens. In Babubhai Vs. State of Gujarat, [ 2010 (12) SCC 254 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that not only fair trial, but fair investigation is also a part of constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has further proceeded to say that therefore the investigation must be fair, transparent and judicious, as it is the minimum requirement of the Rule of Law. 2. In the case on hand, having lost her aged parents, as victims of heinous crime of murder for gain, the petitioner, the daughter of the victims, is before this Court, seeking transfer of the investigation in Crime No.168 of 2005 to the Central Bureau of Investigation from the file of the CBCID Virudhuangar, on the allegation that the present investigation done by the Inspector of Police, CBCID, Virudhunagar, at Theni, could not make any progress, even in identifying the culprits of the said crime. 3. The facts of the case, in brief, would be as follows:- The deceased - Ebenezer Paul and his wife - Sheela were residing in Virudhuangar in their own house. On the night, intervening 06.04.2005 and 07.04.2005, the deceased were alone in the house. On 07.04.2005, when the housemaid came for work, she found both the deceased in a pool of blood. She raised alarm, which attracted the people from the neighbourhood. They entered into the house and found both the deceased with stab injuries and they were dead. On the complaint lodged by one Mr.T.Jeyakumar, a resident of the said locality, the Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar, East Police Station, registered a case in Crime No.168 of 2005 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on 07.04.2005, at 10.30 AM. Though it was confirmed during the investigation that the deceased were done to death by committing murders, the culprits could not be identified. There was no clue gathered by the Investigating Officer. 4. Though it was confirmed during the investigation that the deceased were done to death by committing murders, the culprits could not be identified. There was no clue gathered by the Investigating Officer. 4. Having waited for a considerable time, Mr.E.Joshua Milton, the son of the deceased, filed Crl.OP.[MD].No.4909 of 2006, seeking transfer of investigation of this case to the CBCID. When the said Criminal Original Petition came up for hearing before this Court, it was informed by the learned Government Advocate [Criminal Side] that during the course of investigation, the finger prints of the culprits had been collected from the scene of occurrence and the weapon of offence was also recovered. The learned Government Advocate [Criminal Side] further submitted to this Court that a Special Team had been constituted for the purpose of tracing the culprits. 5. But, this Court was not satisfied with the investigation and with the statement made by the learned Government Advocate [Criminal Side]. This Court expressed its anguish that even after lapse of 14 months of the murder of two aged people, that too, for gain, the investigation could not make any progress to trace the real culprits. On that footing, this Court, by order dated 04.07.2006, ordered transferring the investigation to the Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Virudhunagar, with a further direction to the Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Virudhunagar, to depute an Officer of the said department to further investigate the matter, in accordance with law. Accordingly, the Inspector of Police, Virudhuangar East Police Station, Virudhunagar, handed over the case diary to the Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Virudhuagar, as directed. But, unfortunately, the CBCID also could not make any breakthrough. 6. Ms.E.Mary Olivia, the daughter of the deceased, having waited for nine long years, hoping that the investigation would reach the logical end to trace the real culprits and having found that there was no such desirable progress made in the investigation, has, again, come with the present Criminal Original Petition, knocking at the doors of this Court, seeking transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation from the file of the CBCID Virudhuangar. That is how, the present Criminal Original Petition is before this Court. 7. Mr.G.Srinivasan, the Inspector of Police, CBCID, Theni, who lastly conducted the investigation, has filed a counter affidavit, wherein he has stated that he is the ninth officer from the CBCID to investigate the case. That is how, the present Criminal Original Petition is before this Court. 7. Mr.G.Srinivasan, the Inspector of Police, CBCID, Theni, who lastly conducted the investigation, has filed a counter affidavit, wherein he has stated that he is the ninth officer from the CBCID to investigate the case. After taking over the investigation, according to him, he has examined several witnesses. He has visited the scene of occurrence and he has also verified the finger prints lifted from the place of occurrence. He has further stated that all these nine officers, who have investigated the case, have examined as many as 400 persons so far, as witnesses. But, unfortunately, the culprits could not be identified or traced. In Paragraph No.9 of the counter, he has stated as follows:- "9. I humbly submit that I also submit the averment made in para 8 in the petition is incorrect. I submit that I and my predecessor have made earnest investigation in this case so far and left no stones unturned to find out the real culprits and because of the lack of information and evidences and non-operation of the petitioner and her brother, the above case is in lethargic [sic]. At this juncture, the case was treated as UN [Un-detectable] and RCS notice was duly served to the petitioner on 24.01.2014 on behalf of her brother Tr.Milton, who is seriously ill and inactive and who is also the petitioner in Crl.OP.No, through which the case was ordered for CBCID investigation as per the honourable High Court, Madurai Bench". 8. From the above statement, it is crystal clear that the investigation has already been closed treating the same, as undetectable. Having said so in Paragraph No.9, the Inspector of Police, in the succeeding Paragraph has stated as follows:- "I further submit that even thouth case is treated as UN, since deep investigation was done so far by the CBCID, I.O's I am constantly taking meticulous efforts in tracking information or clues to find out the real culprits and book them in accordance with law and on the furtherance of co-operation of the petitioner and her side and any further clue comes into light I am at once ready to re-open the case at any point of time with the prior permission of the concerned." 9. Having seen the counter affidavit and after having enquired Mr.G.Srinivasan, the Inspector of Police, CBCID, Theni, on 07.04.2015, when the matter was heard, this Court had expressed its unhappiness over the above statement. 10. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, referring to the above statement of the Inspector of Police, submitted that when the Inspector of Police, CBCID, Theni, himself has stated that the culprits could not be traced, there will no purpose served in keeping the case at the hands of the present officer and instead, the matter could be transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation. 11. Mr.S.Jeyakumar, the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the fourth respondent, on 07.04.2015, submitted that the CBI is already over burdened with lot of investigations. If the present case is also transferred to the CBI, this will only add more workload to the CBI, which will be a hindrance for the CBI to concentrate in many other cases, which are already pending, which have got international ramifications. The learned Special Public Prosecutor has also placed reliance on certain observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of West Bengal & others, Vs. The Committee for Protection of Domacratic Rights, West Bengal and others, [2010 [2] CTC 84], wherein in Paragraph No.46, it is held as follows:- "46. Before parting with the case, we deem it necessary to emphasize that despite powers conferred by Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, while passing any order, the Courts must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these constitutional powers. The very plenitude of the power under the said Articles requires great caution in its exercise. Insofar as the question of issuing a direction to the CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instill confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. This extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instill confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. Otherwise, the CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and with limited resources, may find it difficult to properly investigate even serious cases and in the process lose its credibility and purpose with unsatisfactory investigations". 12. Mr.C.Mayil Vahana Rajendran, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the State of Tamil Nadu, on 07.04.2015, submitted that if one more opportunity is afforded to the CBCID, the investigation would be re-opened and investigation would be done, properly. 13. Having heard the said submission, Mr. S.Jeyakumar, the learned Special Public Prosecutor, suggested that instead of allowing the present officer to continue the investigation, it would be better that a Special Team is constituted for the said purpose. 14. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is also agreeable for the said suggestion. 15. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the Superintendent of Police, South Zone, CBCID, would appear before this Court today and make his further submissions. Accordingly, today, as directed on 07.04.2015, Mr.T.S.Anbu, the Superintendent of Police, CBCID, South Zone, appeared before this Court. During the course of today's proceedings, it has been brought to my notice that so far as CBCID of Tamil Nadu is concerned, the cases of both murder and murder for gain, which were pending investigation for more than five years, numbering 13, have been closed, as undetectable, as it has been done in the present case by the CBCID. He further submitted that five such cases, which are more than five years old, are still pending with them under investigation. He also submitted that in the year 2013 alone, they have successfully investigated six murder cases and two murder for gain cases and laid final reports against the accused. Referring to the above statistics, Mr.T.S.Anbu, Superintendent of Police, CBCID, would submit that with great difficulty, the CBCID Police Officers are trying to cope with the demand for detailed investigation in these cases. 16. Referring to the above statistics, Mr.T.S.Anbu, Superintendent of Police, CBCID, would submit that with great difficulty, the CBCID Police Officers are trying to cope with the demand for detailed investigation in these cases. 16. When this Court wanted him to express his difficulties, if any, in investigating the cases, he submitted that since most of the cases are transferred, either on the orders of the Court or by the Director General of Police or by the Government, after having noticed that local police have not investigated the cases satisfactorily, when the cases come to the hands of the CBCID, the golden time for investigation has been lost. He would also submit that going by the volume of work, more number of officials are required in the department of CBCID. 17. At this juncture, I would like to mention that the CBCID is considered to be a Premier Investigating Agency so far as the State of Tamil Nadu is concerned. People repose their faith in the CBCID and they expect the CBCID to act swiftly and that would trace the real culprits. If a Premier Agency, like CBCID itself, could say that they are not able to investigate the case and trace the culprits, I do not know where the people will go to have their grievances redressed. The expectation, not only of this Court, but also the people of this State, is that the CBCID should be strengthened with adequate men power, that too, with officers with special skill in the matter of investigation and with scientific knowledge. 18. Now, there is a cry in many quarters in many matters that the investigation should be transferred to the CBI. In my view, this is not good for the Tamil Nadu Police. Tamil Nadu Police are not inferior to any other police even to CBI. But, at the same time, the justification for the people to ask for transfer of the investigation to CBI also cannot be said to be ill-founded. As a matter of fact, this Court itself has transferred many cases to the CBI for investigation. To cite one case, I may refer to an order passed by me in Crl.OP.No.15838 of 2011, dated 16.12.2014. That was a case, where a School Teacher was found murdered for gain on 08.10.1999. There were no eye-witnesses to the occurrence. The case was registered on 08.10.1999. To cite one case, I may refer to an order passed by me in Crl.OP.No.15838 of 2011, dated 16.12.2014. That was a case, where a School Teacher was found murdered for gain on 08.10.1999. There were no eye-witnesses to the occurrence. The case was registered on 08.10.1999. The investigation was initially taken up by the Inspector of Police, attached to Vikravandi Circle. Since there was no progress made in the investigation to trace the culprits, this Court passed an interim order on 05.06.2000, transferring the investigation to the CBCID with a fond hope- "as this Court always have" - that the CBCID would unearth the truth and trace the culprits. Though the murder took place in 1999, till 2011, there was no progress made even by the CBCID. Therefore, the husband of the deceased approached this Court by filling Crl.OP.No.15838 of 2011 seeking transfer the investigation. In the said case, the Investigating Officer belonging to the CBCID filed a counter stating that seventeen officers, either in the rank of Inspector of Police or in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police had tried their level best, by investigating the case to unearth the truth and to trace the culprits. A total number of 454 witnesses were examined. But, there also, unfortunately, they could not trace the culprits and they could not get any clue. Having seen the said statement, this Court passed an order on 16.12.2014, transferring the investigation to the CBI, Chennai. Thus, transfer was made after 14 years of the occurrence. 19. In the case on hand, from the statement of the Superintendent of Police, it is seen that there are number of cases pending with the CBCID for more than five years, where also they could not make any progress. If the position of the CBCID itself is like this, it will be shocking, if this Court intends to get statistics from the local police, which I do not want to do for the present. 20. As rightly stated by the Superintendent of Police, it is the high time that in order to enhance the faith of the people and to restore the glory of the Tamil Nadu Police, more particularly, CBCID, the Government should strengthen the said Force with adequate number of well trained officers with scientific knowledge. 20. As rightly stated by the Superintendent of Police, it is the high time that in order to enhance the faith of the people and to restore the glory of the Tamil Nadu Police, more particularly, CBCID, the Government should strengthen the said Force with adequate number of well trained officers with scientific knowledge. Forensic Experts may also be included in the department so that immediately, after the crime, the Forensic Experts may visit the site and help the Investigating Officer to take forward the investigation in the proper direction. 21. Having heard the above observations of this Court, the Superintendent of Police, CBCID, South Zone, assured this Court that he himself would take up the investigation, after re-opening the same and make progress and report the same to this Court. The said statement made by him deserves to be appreciated. I am sure that if he is able to trace the culprits and unearth the truth, he will deserve for more appreciation from this Court. I am only hopeful. 22. In view of the same, I am inclined to direct Mr.T.S.Anbu, the Superintendent of Police, CBCID, South Zone, to re-open the investigation, take up the same, form a Team headed by him and conduct investigation expeditiously in a fair manner. 23. For this course, the learned counsel for the petitioner is also agreeable and he does not press for transfer of the investigation to the CBI, for the present. The said statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is recorded. 24. Having said all the above, I am of the view that if I stop with this, without making any provision for compensation, it would not amount to doing justice to the victims. In this regard, I may refer to Section 357(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Though this provision was introduced in the year 2009 and immediately, after some time, it came into force in the State of Tamil Nadu, the authorities referred to in Section 357(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, including the Courts, could not order for victim compensation in the State of Tamil Nadu, because, there was no scheme framed, as required under Section 357(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, immediately. This was noticed by a Division Bench of this Court, to which I was a Party, in Kattu Raja's case [vide 2013 (2) CTC 72 ]. This was noticed by a Division Bench of this Court, to which I was a Party, in Kattu Raja's case [vide 2013 (2) CTC 72 ]. In the said case, this Court issued a direction to implement Section 357(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and to put in place an appropriate scheme. Now, fortunately, the State of Tamil Nadu has brought into force a scheme, known as "Tamil Nadu Victim Compensation Scheme, 2013", issued under Section 357(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is also appreciable that, as of now, in the said fund, a sum of Rs.1,70,00,000/- has been allotted to the Unit Officers under the control of the Director General of Police and a sum of Rs.30 lakhs has been kept as Reserve Fund. Under Section 357(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, so far as the courts of law are concerned, they can make a recommendation to the District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal Services Authority, as the case may be, to decide the quantum of compensation to be awarded from and out of the said fund. Section 357(A)(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as follows:- "Where the offender is not traced or identified, but the victim is identified and where no trial takes place, the victim or his dependants may make an application to the State or the District Legal Services Authority for award of compensation". 25. In the case on hand, as of now, the culprits have not been traced and the Investigating Officer has closed the case as undetectable. The dependants of the victims have waited for ten long years. At this length of time, in my considered opinion, it may not be necessary for this Court to direct the dependants of the victims to approach the District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal Services Authority for award of the compensation under the said scheme. InCrl.OP.No.15838 of 2011, dated 16.12.2014, taking the view that it would cause hardship to direct the parties to approach the District Legal Services Authority, this Court itself directed the payment of compensation to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- to the dependants of the victims. That was, perhaps, the first case in which the victim compensation was ordered under Section 357(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This case is also on the same footing. That was, perhaps, the first case in which the victim compensation was ordered under Section 357(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This case is also on the same footing. As per the said scheme, for loss of life, upto a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- could be awarded. 26. In the case on hand, having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the son of the deceased is in a critical condition, the fact that the petitioner herein is also not placed well, the fact that for ten years, the dependants of the victims have been waiting for justice and also the fact that they have spent a considerable amount by approaching this Court, from time to time, I deem it appropriate to issue a direction to the Director General of Police to pay compensation to Mr.E.Joshua Milton, son of the deceased and Ms.E.Mary Olivia, daughter of the deceased, the petitioner herein. Insofar as the quantum is concerned, in my considered view, having regard to the totality of the circumstances, they can be awarded a total sum of Rs.4,00,000/-, viz., Rs.2,00,000/- to each of the dependants. 27. In the result, the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of in the following terms:- The investigation of the case in Crime No.168 of 2005 is directed to be re-opened and the same shall be taken up by Mr.T.S.Anbu, the Superintendent of Police, CBCID, South Zone, who shall form a team, headed by him and investigate the case thoroughly and expeditiously. The Director General of Police is directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation from and out of the Reserve Fund, under the Tamil Nadu Victim Compensation Scheme, 2013, to Mr.E.Joshua Milton, son of the deceased and Ms.E.Mary Olivia, daughter of the deceased, the petitioner herein, within a period of three months from today, out of which Mr.E.Joshua Milton and the petitioner herein shall take Rs.2,00,000/- each. It is made clear that if the petitioner is not further satisfied with the further investigation, she can approach this Court again, after 15.07.2015.