Abuse of public interest litigation for self-aggrandizement is detrimental to the administration of justice.

V. Ramkumar, J.

1. In this petition filed under S.482 CrPC the petitioner claims himself to be a public interest litigant seeks to quash Annexure C order dated 05/02/2008 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam dismissing his application (CMP No. 806/08) seeking certain directions to the CBI to conduct further investigation in the Sr. Abhaya Case pursuant to the narco analysis test reports. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, observing that the petition was another vain attempt to somehow cling on to the matter, and placing reliance on the observations of this Court in the judgment dated 11/01/2008 in WP (C) 35590 of 2007 dismissed the application warning the petitioner that at present the Magistrate is not mulcting the petitioner with costs for filing the petition in a case where the petitioner has no locus standi.

2. I heard Sr. Advocate Sri. K. Ramakumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Adv. Sri. M. V. S. Nampoothiri, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the C.B.I. and Adv. Sri. A. X. Varghese appearing for the father of deceased Sr. Abhaya.

3. Sri. K. Ramakumar, the learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the revision petitioner made the following submissions in support of the revision:

The petitioner is a public activist and a prominent worker in the field of human rights. He is also the convenor of Sr. Abhaya Case Action Council. He has been spearheading the case of Sr. Abhaya ever since 31/03/1992. It was the petitioner who was instrumental for the investigation of the case which was eventually taken over by the CBI. The petitioner in his capacity as the convenor of the aforesaid action council had been taking various steps both before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam as well as this Court. Unfortunately, even after the CBI took over the investigation and made some progress the proceedings before Court were tardy and were moving at a snail pace. It was under these circumstances that the petitioner filed CMP 806 of 2008 before the Court below for a direction to the CBI for further investigation based on the narco analysis test report and to file a progress report before Court. The learned Magistrate went wrong in extracting certain observations in the order of this Court in Crl. MP 2154 of 2005 filed by the petitioner and treated those observations as adverse remarks against the petitioner. This Court had clarified in a review petition filed by the petitioner that they were not adverse observations made against the petitioner and that this Court was only noticing certain allegations against the petitioner. The learned Magistrate was clearly in error in holding that this Court had held that the petitioner has no locus standi in the matter. As a member of the public he had sufficient locus to move the Magistrate. This Court had in Nandakumar v. State, 2008 (2) KHC 543 : 2008 (2) KLT 913 : 2008 (2) KLJ 329 : ILR 2008 (2) Ker. 663 had expanded the horizon of locus standi in the matter of withdrawal from criminal prosecution. When the investigation by the former investigating officer was being stifled by high level intervention resulting in culpable inertia on the part of the present officer in charge of the investigation, the petitioner was only attempting to alert the CBI. By dismissing the petition filed by the revision petitioner the Chief Judicial Magistrate has virtually abdicated his duties. The petitioner had been putting up a relentless battle against the forces which were responsible for the tragic death of Sister Abhaya. It was the petitioner who fought the case for the past 16 years and whatever investigation worth its name has been conducted only after the petitioner came to the scene and started crusading the cause. Hence, the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate is liable to be set aside.

4. I am afraid that I cannot agree with the above submissions. It may be true that the petitioner had intervened in the proceedings before the Chief Judicial Magistrate and be