Judgement

NATARAJAN, J.:- This appeal by special leave is by a Gazetted Police Officer to seek expunction of certain adverse remarks passed against him by the High Court of Kerala in an order passed with reference to two Criminal miscellaneous petitions filed by respondents 2 and 3 herein without issuing any notice to him and without hearing him.

2. The somewhat unusual circumstances in which the appellant has been made the victim of strictures by the High Court may now be looked into. One Chandrasekaran Pillai residing within the limits of Karunagapally Police Station was charged under S. 302, I.P.C., for having committed the murder of his wife Komalavalli by first beating her and kicking her and then hanging her in order to make it appear that it was a case of suicide. The accuseds son aged about 12 years and a neighbour claimed to have. witnessed the beating as well as the accused dragging the deceased to the western side of the house. A little later the son made bold to go into the house and found his mother hanging with a noose round her neck. He raised alarm and the neighbours including his maternal uncle came to the house and cut the rope and rendered first aid unsuccessfully because Komalavalli had already died.

3. A report was given at Karunagapally Police Station and a case of "suspicious death" was registered and investigation was done by Shri T. P. Rajagopalan, Inspector of Police (respondent 2) who was examined as P.W. 16 in the Sessions Trial against the accused. As the brother of deceased Komalavalli was not satisfied with. the manner of investigation of the local police he filed a petition before the Deputy Inspector General, Southern range. Under orders of the Deputy Inspector General the investigation was entrusted to the Crime Detachment in which the appellant was serving as a Deputy Supdt. of Police. The appellant took charge of the case and his investigation revealed that Komalavallis death was due to homicide and not suicide. The appellant was in charge of the investigation of the case only from 26-11-1980 to 5-1-1981 and thereafter the further investigation was done by another police officer of the Crime Detachment who was examined as P.W. 18 in the trial. The charge sheet was eventually filed by yet another officer viz., P.W. 19 an Inspector of Police.

4. The defence of the accused was that his wife Komalavalli had committed suicide and that he had not murdered her. In support of his defence the accused placed reliance upon the first Investigating Officer, viz, P.W. 16 carrying out a cellophone tape test on the palms of Komalavalli and sending the cellophone tapes to the Forensic Science Laboratory to find out whether any fibres of coir rope were found in the cellophone tape and if so whether the fibres had come out of the coir rope used for the hanging. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory was that the cellophone tape contained fibres of coir which were similar to the coir rope used for the hanging. It was, therefore, contended that Komalavallis death was due to suicide as otherwise fibres from the coir rope used for hanging would not have been found in the palms of her hands. To prove the despatch of the cellophone tapes to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the receipt of the report from the said Laboratory and its despatch to the Crime Detachment a Head Constable of Karunagapally Police Station by name E. Koyakunju (respondent 1) was examined as Defence Witness No. 2.

5. The Sessions Judge entertained serious doubts about P.W. 16 carrying out the cellophone tape test to lift any fibres of coir sticking to the palms of Komalavalli and sending the tapes to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the bona fides of the exercise. We shall set out later the numerous suspicious features noticed by the Sessions Judge regarding the conduct of P.W. 16 and D.W. 2 with reference to the carrying out of the cellophone tape test and the despatch of the tapes to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the entrustment