Judicial remarks against individuals must comply with principles of natural justice, necessitating notice and an opportunity for a hearing before issuing adverse comments, particularly for officials.

ORDER :

This Crl. M. C has been filed to expunge the remarks/strictures made against the petitioner in the judgment dated 03.08.2019 in S.C. No.580/2016 passed by the Assistant Sessions Court (Additional), Palakkad (for short, 'the trial court').

2. The petitioner was working as the Station House Officer (SHO) at Walayar Police Station, Palakkad in the year 2015. A crime was registered by the Walayar Police Station, Palakkad on 02.04.2003 as Crime No.89/2003 against fifteen accused persons alleging offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (IPC). The investigation was taken up by the then SHO of Walayar Police Station, Palakkad, namely, Sri. N. K. Kumaran and he submitted the final report before the Judicial First-Class Magistrate Court-I, Palakkad. The final report was returned by the learned Magistrate on 21.07.2003 noting that the wound certificate of CW2 was not produced along with the final report. Later, in the year 2015, the final report was resubmitted before the Magistrate, and it was taken on file as C.P. No.43/2016. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Palakkad, numbered as S.C. No.580/2016 and was subsequently made over to the trial court.

3. The prosecution case in short is that on 01.04.2003 at about 11 pm, all the accused formed an unlawful assembly, committed rioting with dangerous weapons in front of the Primary Health Center, Kanjikode, restrained CWs 1 to 4, voluntarily caused hurt to them, the 1st accused stabbed CW1, the 2nd accused stabbed CW2, and the 6th accused stabbed CW3.

4. During the trial, PWs 1 to 7 were examined, and Exts.P1 to P9 were marked. The Investigating Officer, Sri. N. K. Kumaran was examined as PW7. After the trial, the court found accused Nos. 1, 2 and 5 to 9 guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 341, 323 and 324 read with Section 149 of the IPC and convicted them under the said counts. Annexure A1 is the judgment.

5. In paragraph No.11 and 26 of Annexure A1 judgment, the trial court made some disparaging remarks/strictures against the petitioner in respect of official acts purported to have been done by him while serving as the Station House Officer at Walayar Police Station, Palakkad and directed the Director General of Police to initiate disciplinary action against him. It was observed that the resubmission of the charge sheet on 09.07.2015 was made by the petitioner without complying with the direction of the court to obtain the wound certificate, and the charge sheet was submitted by the petitioner in the name of the former SHO, Walayar Police Station, Sri. N. K. Kumaran by forging his signature. The trial court concluded that there was apparent forgery committed by the petitioner in signing the charge sheet in the name of Sri. N. K. Kumaran, who was not available as SHO, Walayar, during 2015 or 2014. The trial court forwarded Annexure A1 judgment to the Home Secretary and the Director General of Police for initiating necessary disciplinary action against the petitioner.

6. I have heard Sri. Nandagopal S. Kurup, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. E. C. Bineesh, the learned Public Prosecutor.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial court made adverse remarks against the petitioner in Annexure A1 judgment without putting him to notice and without affording him an opportunity of personal hearing. Reliance was placed on the decisions of the Supreme Court in State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) v. Pankaj Chaudhary and Others [2018 KHC 6866] and S. K. Viswambaran v. E. Koyakunju and Others [ AIR 1987 SC 1436 ] in support of his submission. The learned counsel furt