Trial Must Be Deferred Pending Govt. Decision on Special Public Prosecutor Appointment Request: Kerala High Court

Kerala High Court Stays Murder Trial, Directs State to Decide on Special Prosecutor Plea

Thalassery: The Kerala High Court has directed the state government to decide on a plea for the appointment of a Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) in the politically sensitive Shuhaib murder case. In an order providing temporary relief to the victim's family, Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan also stayed the trial proceedings at the Additional Sessions Court in Thalassery until the government makes a final decision.

Case Background

The writ petition was filed by C.P. Muhammed and another individual, the parents of the deceased victim Shuhaib , who was murdered on February 12, 2018, in Kannur District. Two other petitioners, who were seriously injured in the same attack, also joined the plea.

The case, registered as SC No. 596/2018, is currently pending before the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thalassery. The petitioners allege that Shuhaib , a congress worker, was killed by a "quotation team" associated with the CPIM, the ruling party in the state. Citing these political dimensions, the family expressed a lack of confidence in the standard prosecution and sought a fair trial through an advocate of their choice.

Arguments Presented

The core argument from the petitioners' counsel was that their representation (Ext.P3) to the state government, requesting the appointment of Advocate K. Padmanabhan as the Special Public Prosecutor, was pending without a decision. They contended that proceeding with the trial, where one formal witness had already been examined, would render their request futile and compromise their right to a fair trial. Their immediate grievance was the trial court's decision (Ext.P5) to proceed with the case despite the pending representation.

The learned Public Prosecutor, representing the State of Kerala, acknowledged the submission of the representation for an SPP.

Court's Reasoning and Order

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan observed that it would be improper for the trial to continue while the state government is yet to consider the petitioners' formal request for an SPP. The court emphasized the need for the executive to address such representations in a timely manner.

In the judgment, the court noted:

"Admittedly the petitioners submitted Ext.P3 representation before the 1st respondent for appointment of a Special Public Prosecutor. In such circumstances, before passing orders in it, it is not proper to proceed with the trial."

Based on this reasoning, the High Court disposed of the writ petition with two clear directives:

1. Decision on Representation: The State of Kerala (1st Respondent) is directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioners' representation (Ext.P3) for an SPP "as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks" from the receipt of the judgment copy.
2. Deferment of Trial: The Additional Sessions Court-III, Thalassery, is ordered to "defer the trial in SC No.596/2018" until the state government passes a final order on the representation.

This decision ensures that the victim's family has a definitive answer on their plea for special counsel before the trial progresses further, thereby upholding the principles of procedural fairness.