IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
ADV. M. BAIJU NOEL, S/O M. BIPIN DAS – Petitioner
Versus
ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETATRY (HOME & VIGILANCE), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM and Ors. – Respondents
WP(CRL.) NO. 1042 OF 2024
Decided On : 21-11-2024
(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ petition challenging final report in Crime No. 600/2022 - Allegations of disrespect to the Constitution - Investigation found inadequate - Court ordered further investigation by State Crime Branch due to the nature of the allegations and the status of the accused. (Paras 22, 21, 20, 19)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 156(3) - Jurisdiction of Magistrate to direct investigation - The Magistrate must ensure a fair investigation and reasonable conclusions. (Paras 13, 12)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the final report dropping proceedings against a Minister for alleged disrespect to the Constitution, claiming inadequate investigation.
Findings of Court:
The investigation was deemed improper, necessitating further inquiry by a superior agency.
Issues: The maintainability of the writ petition and the adequacy of the investigation were central questions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for thorough investigation, especially given the serious nature of the allegations against a public figure.
Result: The impugned order was set aside, and further investigation was ordered.
JUDGMENT :
(BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.)
“Constitution is not a mere lawyers document, it is a vehicle of life and its spirit is always the spirit of age. If things go wrong in the new Constitution, the reason will not be that we had a bad Constitution, but what we will have to say is that Man was vile.” B.R Ambedkar’s above words of wisdom must ring in the mind of every Indian citizen who is bound to uphold the Constitution and its ideals. They have particular relevance while appreciating the controversy arising in the instant case.
2. Petitioner seeks for a direction to set aside the final report filed in Crime No. 600/2022 of Keezhvaipur Police Station. He also challenges an order dismissing his petition for further investigation into the above crime. A direction is also sought to entrust the re-investigation of the above crime with the Central Bureau of Investigation.
3. On 03.07.2022, Sri. Saji Cherian, the then Minister of Fisheries and Agriculture, Government of Kerala, while addressing a public function at Pathanamthitta made certain remarks which are alleged to be disrespectful and insulting to the Constitution of India. Several persons, including the petitioner, submitted written complaints to the police. However, when his complaint did not result in the registration of a crime, petitioner approached the jurisdictional Magistrate. Pursuant to a reference under section 156(3) Cr.P.C, FIR No.600/2022 of Keezhvaipur Police Station was registered alleging the commission of an offence under section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act').
4. According to the FIR, on 03.07.2022, the accused had, in a public function made a speech that and thereby disrespected the Indian Constitution and thus committed an offence under section 2 of the Act.
(The literal translation of the above words is as follows: “India has the ideal Constitution to loot the maximum number of people. The Constitution prepared by the British was only written by an Indian. It has been implemented in this country for 75 years. It is written in the Indian Constitution that there will be secularism, democracy ‘Kuntham’ ‘Kodachakram’.”).
5. After completing the investigation, a final report was filed 'dropping further proceedings' by concluding that the accused had no intention to disrespect the Constitution of India in his speech. On receipt of notice of the final report, petitioner filed Crl.M.P No.617/2023 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thiruvalla of to reject the report and to direct further investigation. The learned Magistrate by order dated 15.05.2023 dismissed the said petition after observing that though the pen drive and the CD containing the speech had been forwarded to the Forensic Laboratory, the investigating officer had recorded the statement of 39 witnesses and came to the conclusion that there was no disrespect shown to the Constitution and the circumstances do not warrant a further investigation into the said aspect. As mentioned earlier, the aforesaid order is also challenged.
6. Sri. M.Baiju Noel, the party-in-person, submitted that the words used by the accused in his speech amounted to absolute disrespect of the Constitution of India thereby violating the provisions of the Act. It was also submitted that the investigating officer did not have any material to conclude that the accused had no intention to disrespect the Constitution. The petitioner also questioned the hasty conclusion arrived at by the investigating officer. According to him, the final report was filed even before receiving the forensic report of the audio and video recordings of the speech. According to the petitioner, when a Minister of the State specifically alleges that the Constitution is ideal for looting or exploiting the public, there can be no more disrespect to the Constitution than that and further, the use of the word along with secularism and democracy, indicate absolute disrespect shown to the provisions inclu
Vinay Tyagi v. Irshad Ali @ Deepak and Others (2013) 5 SCC 762
Sindhu Gopalakrishnan v. Sebastian Attokkaran @ Sebastian and Another (2011 KHC 11)
M/s. Pepsi Foods Ltd. and Another v. Special Judicial Magistrate and Others
State of Haryana and Others v. Bhajan Lal and Others 1992 Supp1 SCC 335
Nagendra Nath Bora and Another v. The Commissioner of Hills Division and Appeals, Assam and Others
AI
The court mandated further investigation into allegations of disrespect to the Constitution, emphasizing the need for thoroughness given the accused's status.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of fair investigation in ensuring fair trial as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It establishes that unless there is a serious irregularity....
Sanction for prosecuting a public servant is not required at the initial stage if the alleged offense is not inseparably linked to official duty. Furthermore, a magistrate satisfies the statutory req....
Point of law : There is no more res integra that exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC to quash a criminal proceeding is only when an allegation made in the FIR or the charge-sheet constitutes the....
It is no more res integra that exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a criminal proceeding is only when an allegation made in the FIR or the charge-sheet constitutes the ingredients of....
Disciplinary action under Article 311(2)(b) must be supported by robust evidence; reliance on mere presumptions about witness intimidation without conducting an inquiry contravenes natural justice pr....
Seizer of contraband – Rejection of bail - Contraband seized is a commercial quantity and therefore Section 37 of the NDPS Act, is applicable to the case of the petitioner
The accused do not possess the right to request further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C., as this power is reserved for the investigating agency and the court, ensuring that the inve....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.