AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K.Haripal, J
Petitioner is the father of deceased Jijo Antony whose body was found in a canal behind Lakshmi Bar at Kumarakom on 07.11.2021. In late night
itself, the body was removed to the hospital and Crime No. 1512/2021 of Kumarakom Police Station was registered under Section 174 of the Criminal
Procedure Code on the first information furnished by Jerome Bernad, uncle of the deceased. The petitioner suspects foul play in the death of Jijo
Antony. According to him, his son was working abroad as a Chef from 2015 to 2019, on 07.11.2021, at 7.30 P.M., he along with a friend had gone to
Kumarakom on a bike to pay the hire charges of an Innova car to one Ajith Mohan, on the wayside, in front of the ATM, thinking that the Innova car
parked there was the car hired by him, they patted on the rear door. But two policemen, who sat inside came out and intimidated them. According to
the petitioner, it was a private vehicle. Later, Jijo Antony went to the Lakshmi Resort, the policemen chased him there and the CCTV visuals of the
Lakshmi Resort indicate that after about ten minutes, the policemen were found returning from the resort. Later dead body of Jijo Antony was found
in the canal adjacent to the rear outer wall. In the inquest, injuries were noted on the person of Jijo Antony including a black spot behind his head, as if
he had suffered beat with a torch. The postmortem report also indicates ante mortem injuries. The petitioner asserts that his son died at the hands of
the policemen. After killing him, his body was abandoned in the canal adjacent to the resort. Thereafter, a case as Crime No. 1511/2021 of
Kumarakom police station was registered against the rider of Motor Cycle bearing No. KL-36-G-1071 and another, at the instance of Satheesh
Chandran, the driver of the official car of the District Police Chief. In the night itself the petitioner was called over phone and was directed to produce
his son in police station on the following day at 10.A.M. According to the petitioner, everything was done after realising that his son had died at the
hands of police. Crime No. 1511/2021 was registered as an eyewash to make out that his son had misbehaved with the policemen. The learned
counsel for the petitioner brought to my attention the CCTV visuals, which indicate that the policemen were chasing his son to Lakshmi Bar, his son
was running to the rear side of the bar, policemen had run after him and after sometime they could be seen returning. But thereafter, the whereabouts
of his son were not known. In the night itself, his body was found lying in the canal, behind the bar. There are suspicious circumstances surrounding
the death of his son. Even though it was shown that he was died of drowning, the level of water in the canal was very shallow. According to him, the
body of his son was abandoned in the canal after causing him fatal injuries and as a camouflage, later, a crime was registered as Crime No. 1511/2021
of Kumarakom police station and therefore, he seeks the following reliefs:-
“i) To issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or such other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the Government of Kerala, the third
respondent, to entrust the investigation of Crime No. 1512 of 2021 of the Kumarakom police station, Kottayam District, the crime registered on unnatural death of Jijo
Antony to the Central Bureau of Investigation, 4th respondent.
ii) To issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or such other appropriate writ, directing the 1st respondent to depute a senior impartial police officer
not below the rank of Inspector General of Police, to supervise the present investigation and to take effective and efficacious steps not to tamper with any evidence
in connection with the murder of Jijo Antony on 07.11.2021 occurred in between 9.00 P.M. and 11 P.M. at or around Lakshmi Hotel Kumarakam.
iii) To issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or such other appropriate writ, directing the 1st respondent to put on suspension the four police
officers following Jijo Antony to Lakshmi Hotel at 8.40 P.M. on 07.11.2021 and initiate disciplinary action, if necessary.
iv) To issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or such other appropriate writ, directing the 1st respondent to exhume the body of deceased Jijo
Antony who was murdered on 07.11.2021 occurred in between 9.P.M. and 11 P.M. and conduct fresh postmortem through a reputed senior police surgeon and
videograph the entire procedure therein;â€
When heard, the learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated that there is foul play in the death of the son. As the police officials are suspects,
especially when the driver of the District Police Chief himself is in the dock, if the investigation is done by the local police, mystery will not be
unravelled. Moreover, ante mortem injuries sustained by his son have to be investigated into. If proper examination of the visuals in the camera
installed in the premises of the hotel were examined, the real picture would have come out. Moreover, if the local police investigates the case, the
employees of the bar who know the real facts will not speak out the truth.
The Investigating Officer filed a detailed report. The statement indicates that on 07.11.2021, at 8.20 hours, when the official vehicle of the District
Police Chief, KL-01-BX- 285, driven by the defacto complainant in Crime No. 1511/2021 of Kumarakom police station accompanied by the security
officer, Anish K.G., was parked in front of the ATM, a person came there and forcibly opened the door of the car and uttered abuses against them,
who were in uniform. When the police officials stepped out, the said Jijo Antony ran towards the Lakshmi Resorts and Bar. Then both the policemen,
searched him in the bar along with watchman one Sabu, but he could not be traced. Later, the matter was informed to Kumarakom police station and
thus Crime No. 1511/2021 was registered at the instance of Satheesh Chandran alleging offence under Sections 341, 294(b) and 34 of the Indian
Penal Code. Meanwhile, the said Jijo Antony was found missing and during search at 23.41 hours, he was found lying in a prone position in the canal
outside the compound wall, where the canal was 3.55 metres steep from the top of the compound wall. The canal contained mud and water upto to
the height of 35 cms. The matter was informed to Kumarakom Police Station and thus, Crime No. 1512/2021 was registered under Section 174 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure on the statement of Jerome Bernad. In order to bring transparency and fairness in investigation, the inquest was
conducted by the Tahsildar and Executive Magistrate, Kottayam. CCTV footages of six cameras in the bar were seized and produced before the Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Kottayam; mobile phone and chappals of the deceased were recovered. At the instance of the District Police Chief, the Deputy
Police Superintendent, Crime Branch took over investigation; he conducted investigation, questioned 45 witnesses including the petitioner, examined
visuals of the cameras. From his investigation, it is clear that allegations of the petitioner that police was responsible for the death of Jijo Antony has
no basis. The investigation was conducted in a fair and proper manner and still, there is no objection in transferring the investigation to the State Crime
Branch.
The learned Senior Public Prosecutor pointed out that there is absolutely nothing to suspect any foul play in the death of Jijo Antony; it may be true
that following him, two policemen had entered the bar, but after a while, it can be seen that they were returning from the bar very casually. They
could not find Jijo Antony inside the bar. In all probability, Jijo Antony might have jumped the outer wall of the bar and accidentally fallen into the canal
containing mud and died in the process. If policemen had catched him, watchman and other staff members of the bar might have seen the incident.
There were cameras and no foul play can be doubted as alleged by the petitioner. Moreover, it cannot be believed that the official vehicle of the
District Police Chief could not be recognized by the said Jijo Antony. When he had forcibly opened the rear door and uttered abuses against the
officials, they stepped out of the car and questioned him. The argument that it was a private vehicle cannot be believed. The driver as well as the
security officer, both were in uniform.
The contentions of the petitioner and the respondents are cutting each other. From the visuals exhibited before Court, it is seen that two police
officials could be seen chasing a man towards the said hotel and after a while, both were seen returning from the hotel. We do not know what had
transpired in between. But one thing is sure, after the said chase, no one had seen the said Jijo Antony alive. In the night itself his body was found
floating in the canal behind the hotel. There were ante mortem injuries on the person. That has to be properly probed into.
The report of the Investigating Officer indicates that level of water in the canal was very thin. Therefore, how an able bodied person would drown
in the canal is beyond one's imagination. Similarly, it was stated that, in the night itself, police had contacted the petitioner and wanted his son to be
taken to the police station on the next day at 10 A.M. Jijo Antony is a grown up person. If he was a suspect in Crime No. 1511/2021, how father is
bound to produce him in police station, also goes beyond comprehension.
Again, the petitioner has a case that at the time when some altercation had taken place between Jijo Antony and the two policemen, Jijo Antony
was accompanied by one of his friends. Even though the case diary was made available, it could not be understood as to whether the said person was
traced and his statement was recorded. If such a person was there in the company of Jijo Antony, his version has to be given proper weightage. It is
also necessary and appropriate that all the visuals from the cameras installed around the hotel be seized and examined for proper appreciation of
materials.
Moreover, the petitioner has a clear case that some foul play was done by two policemen who were attached to the District Police Chief.
Therefore, there is justification in him insisting a fair and transparent investigation done in the matter to rule out any foul play. Therefore, if the officials
from within the district investigate the case, an unbiased and fair opinion might not come out.
On taking into consideration all these aspects, it is felt that this is not a fit case for entrusting investigation with an outside agency as prayed for by
the petitioner. Still, if an officer under the supervision of an officer at higher level, in the rank of Inspector General of Police investigates the case, that
would evince confidence of the petitioner as well.
In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to entrust the investigation of the case with an officer at the rank of
Inspector General of Police, having impeccable integrity and file a final report, at the earliest.