Important Points:
For a very minor injury suffered by the defacto complainant in the crime, a grave offence under Sec.308 IPC was framed against the 4th respondent, which can never be said to be an innocent action on the part of the petitioners, and definitely such conduct on the part of the petitioners has caused grievous hurt to the complainant-State Police Complaints Authority is not vested with any powers to entertain any appeal from the orders passed by the District Police Complaints Authority-It can never be said that the State Police Complaints Authority, a superior authority, has exceeded its jurisdiction to exercise the power conferred under Sec.110(1)(ii) of Act, 2011-It would appear from the provision that such delineation of power is made in order to regulate the flow of complaints to the superior authority, and which can never be termed as an exercise to oust the power of the State authority.

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to quash Ext.P1 order passed by the State Police Complaints Authority in O.P.No.316 of 2013, whereby the State Police Chief was directed to look into the complaint made by the 4th respondent against the petitioners who have submitted a final report incorporating charge under Sec. 308 IPC against the 4th respondent. Brief material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

2. Petitioners are Police Officers in the State Police Department. At the time of complaint, 1st petitioner was working as Sub Inspector at Adoor Police Station, Pathanamthitta, and the 2nd petitioner was working as Circle Inspector of Police at CBCID (Economic Offence-I) at Thiruvananthapuram. The 4th respondent filed Ext.P2 complaint before the State Police Complaints Authority against the petitioners. The 1st respondent proceeded in the matter, which, according to the petitioners, without jurisdiction since there is a clear delineation of power made under Sec.110(1) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011, and the State Police Complaints Authority is only vested with powers to consider complaints against the Police Officers of and above the rank of Superintendent of Police, and against the officers of other rank in grave cases of sexual harassment of women in custody, death, grievous hurt, rape etc. Therefore, the sum and substance of the contention advanced is that, the jurisdiction in all other cases are conferred on the Police Complaints Authority at District level. That apart, it is submitted that, the 1st respondent denied a fair opportunity to cross-examine PW2 and to make final submissions in the matter, and therefore, Ext.P1 suffers from the vice of arbitrariness and illegality. Accordingly, the recommendation made to the State Police Chief to take action against the petitioners cannot be sustained under law. It is also contended that, the entire action of the State Police Complaints Authority is violative of the basic rights and guarantees extended to the petitioners under the Constitution of India and the laws, to have a fair trial in the complaint adjudicated by the Authority.

3. I have heard Sri. K. Abdul Jawad, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Rashmi K.M., learned Government Pleader and perused the pleadings and the documents on record.

4. The paramount contention advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners is relying upon Sec.110 of the Kerala Police Act, 2011, whereby the Police Complaints Authority at the State and District level are constituted, which read thus:

“110. Police Complaints Authority.—

(1) The Government shall constitute a State Police Complaints Authority for examining and inquiring the,--

(i) complaints on all types of misconduct against Police Officers of and above the rank of Superintendent of Police;

(ii) grave complaints against officers of other ranks in respect of sexual harassment of women in custody or causing death of any person or inflicting grievous hurt or any person or rape etc.

(2) The State Authority shall consist of the following members, namely:--

(i) a retired Judge of a High Court who shall be the Chairperson of the Authority;

(ii) an officer not below the rank of Principal Secretary to Government;

(iii) an officer not below the rank of Additional Director General of Police;

(iv) a person as may be fixed by the Government, in consultation with the Leader of Opposition, from a three member panel of retired suitable officers not below the rank of Inspector General of Police furnished by the Chairman of the State Human Rights Commission; and

(v) a person as may be fixed by the Government, in consultation with the Leader of Opposition, from a three member panel of retired suitable District Judges furnished by the State Lok Ayuktha.

(3) The Government shall constitute the Police Complaints Authority at district level for examining and inquiring the complaints against Police Officers of and up to the said rank of Deputy Superintendent of P