Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J.
Manjusha K. W/o Naveen Babu – Petitioner
Versus
Central Bureau Of Investigation, Kochi – Respondent
W.P. (Crl.) No. 1297 of 2024
Decided On : 06-01-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 193 and 230 - Writ petition seeking transfer of investigation into unnatural death of a public servant from SIT to CBI - Petitioner alleged bias and inefficiency of SIT due to accused's political influence - Court held that mere allegations do not warrant transfer; investigation by SIT found adequate and proper - Prayer for CBI probe disallowed. (Paras 21, 22)
(B) Investigation - Principles governing transfer of investigation - Court reiterated that transfer to CBI must be in rare and exceptional cases where local police lack credibility - Established that the investigation must be fair and thorough without undue influence. (Paras 12, 13, 20)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought a CBI probe following the suicide of her husband, alleging that he faced public humiliation and threats from a political figure leading to his death. The investigation was initially conducted by the local police, later taken over by a Special Investigation Team. (Paras 1-4)
Findings of Court:
The SIT's investigation was found to be thorough, with proper procedures followed in gathering evidence and conducting inquiries, dispelling claims of bias or inefficiency. (Paras 16, 20)
Issues: Whether the investigation should be transferred to the CBI based on allegations of bias and improper conduct by the local police. (Paras 11, 22)
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the mere presence of political influence does not justify a CBI investigation; the existing investigation must be shown to be inadequate or biased to warrant such a transfer. (Paras 13, 20)
Result: Prayer to transfer investigation to CBI disallowed; SIT directed to continue investigation diligently and report progress. (Paras 22)
JUDGMENT :
KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J.
1. The distressed wife of the late Sri Naveen Babu, the former Additional District Magistrate of Kannur, has approached this court seeking a CBI probe into the unnatural death of her husband.
2. The petitioner’s husband was found dead by hanging in his official quarters on October 15, 2024. At 10.15 a.m. on the same day, Kannur Town Police registered a crime as Crime No. 1149/2024 under Section 194 of BNSS. During the investigation, it was revealed that Sri Naveen Babu faced public humiliation at the hands of the former Kannur District Panchayath President, Smt. P.P. Divya, during his farewell function on the previous evening. It was further revealed that in her speech during the farewell function, Smt Divya had accused the deceased of corruption in connection with the issuance of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for opening a fuel outlet, threatened him of exposure within two days, recorded the visuals of the event to propagate the same through social media with an intent to publicly humiliate him and left the function before the memento was handed over to the deceased. This caused mental strain on Sri Naveen Babu, and he was forced to commit suicide. Hence, Section 194 of BNSS was deleted, Section 108 of BNS was added, and Smt P.P. Divya was arrayed as the sole accused. A report to that effect was submitted before the jurisdictional Magistrate on 17/10/2024.
3. Sri. Savyasachi, S.I., Kannur Town P.S. conducted the initial part of the investigation. Later Sri. Sreejith Koderi, Inspector of Police, Kannur Town took up the investigation on 16/10/2024. The accused surrendered at Kannapuram Police Station on 29/10/2024; her arrest was recorded, and she was produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate Court and remanded to judicial custody. She was released on bail on 08/11/2024 as per the order of the Sessions Court, Thalasserry. Considering the sensational nature and gravity of the case, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by Sri. Ajit Kumar, IPS, District Police Chief was constituted on 25/10/2024 for effective investigation of the case as per Ext. R4(c) proceedings of the I.G of Police. The case is currently being investigated by the SIT.
4. In her plea for a CBI probe, the petitioner claims that the ‘namesake’ SIT, comprising officers from the local police station, has failed to investigate the case fairly and impartially. According to her, the accused holds influential political positions, and the investigation team is attempting to conceal evidence and aiding the accused in fabricating evidence. The petitioner also alleges that the possibility of homicidal hanging cannot be ruled out.
5. The 4th respondent, on behalf of respondents 2 to 4, filed a detailed counter-affidavit refuting the allegations in the writ petition. It is contended that the SIT, which is led and supervised by high-ranking officers, has been conducting the investigation expeditiously and in a free and impartial manner. It is further contended that considering the public interest involved, the investigation is being conducted with utmost priority, adhering to all best practices in a criminal investigation and taking all measures to avoid any loopholes. It is also contended that no exceptional circumstances have been canvassed to entrust the investigation with the CBI and ordering of an investigation in a case of this nature by the CBI is unwarranted.
6. I have heard Sri. V. John Sebastian Ralph, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. T.A. Shaji, the learned Director General of Prosecution (DGP), Sri. P. Narayanan, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Dr. K.P. Satheesan, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for CBI.
7. The learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri V. John Sebastian Ralph, submitted that the accused has strong political ties with the ruling party, and due to her political influence, she is receiving assistance from the police to fabricate evidence in her favour. According to the learned Counsel, t
Transfer of investigation to CBI requires exceptional circumstances; mere allegations of bias or political influence are insufficient to warrant such action.
Transfer of investigation requires concrete evidence of bias, not mere allegations; the integrity of the investigation must be maintained.
It is trite law that Article 21 embraces both the life and liberty of the accused as well as the interest of the victim, his or her near and dear ones, as well as of the community at large.
Judicial intervention in criminal investigations is warranted to ensure fair process and public trust when local authorities are ineffective or biased.
Criminal Law - Transfer of investigation - Not rarest of rare case - Investigation to be conducted officer above rank of A.C.P.
Point of law : Criminal Law – Transfer of investigation - Transfer of investigation to CBI is not a matter of routine, in extraordinary circumstances by using powers of this Court sparingly in except....
If a citizen, who is a defacto complainant in a criminal case alleging commission of a cognizable offence affecting violation of his legal or fundamental rights against influential persons, prays bef....
The necessity for a C.B.I. investigation arises in cases where police personnel are accused, ensuring fairness and public confidence in the judicial process.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
