IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(Crl.).No. 160 of 2009(S)
1. VIJAYAMMA SASEENDRAN, W/O. SASEENDRAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K.S.BABU,
... Respondent
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF
For Petitioner :SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Dated :05/05/2009
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON & C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ.
-------------------------------------------------
W.P.(Crl).No. 160 OF 2009
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of May, 2009
J U D G M E N T
P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.
The petitioner, wife of the detenu, approached this
Court stating that her husband was missing with effect from
20.4.2009, having been abducted by some political rivals
particularly at the instigation of the first respondent and some
others. It was stated that the detenu was under illegal
confinement, despite the fact that he was the Vice President of
the Poothadi Grama Panchayath, Wayanad. The alleged
abduction was mainly with a view to see that the petitioner’s
husband would not be available for the voting proposed to be
held on 27.4.2009 and thereby to defeat the “motion of no
confidence”.
2. Pursuant to the intervention made by this Court, the
additional fifth respondent produced the detenu on 28.4.2009.
The detenu submitted that he was forcibly taken away by the
culprits in a motor vehicle; that he was beaten up and that much
WP(Crl)160/2009
2
harassment and hardship had been caused to him. Observing
that the detenu was not produced before any Magistrate despite
registration of a crime, this Court had given necessary
instructions to have the detenu produced before the concerned
Magistrate and to record his statement positively, on 29.4.2009,
and to forward a report by the concerned Magistrate.
3. Pursuant to the above direction, the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-II, Sulthan Bathery, vide report dated
30.4.2009, has conveyed that the detenu was produced before
the Magistrate at 9 a.m. on 29.4.2009; that his statement was
recorded on oath, which was read over to him and after
obtaining his signature, he was set at liberty. The said report,
along with a true copy of the statement obtained from the detenu
has been forwarded to this Court. We have gone through the
report as well as the statement.
4. The learned Government Pleader with reference to
the report submitted by the police authorities submits that all
necessary steps have been taken by the police to book the
culprits and a crime has been registered under Sections 365,
368 and 345 read with section 120B and section 34 of the Indian
WP(Crl)160/2009
3
Penal Code. It is further stated that all the five accused have
been arrested and produced before the Magistrate and they have
been remanded to the judicial custody. It is added by the
learned Government Pleader that the matter has been given
serious attention and investigation is going on; asserting that
every effort will be taken to see that the investigation is taken to
its logical conclusion. Learned Government Pleader also refers
to the affidavit dated 4.5.2009 filed by the Circle Inspector of
Police, Pulpally, Wayanad, where the sequence of events has
been described in detail.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances, we find that
the police has taken appropriate action honouring the directions
given by this Court in the right spirit and perspective; though the
course pursued by them before intervention of this Court can’t
but be deprecated in the strongest possible words. This Court
earnestly desire and hope that the investigation now being
conducted by the police will be carried out effectively, to see that
the persons who have taken law into their hands will be dealt
with in the most appropriate manner as provided under the law.
While recording the submissions made as above, this Court finds
WP(Crl)160/2009
4
that the purpose of the ‘Habeas Corpus’ petition has been served
whereby the detenu has been produced before the court and has
been set at liberty. In the said circumstances, the Writ Petition
for Habeas Corpus is closed, without prejudice to the rights of
the detenu to pursue further appropriate action in connection
with the grievances, if any.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.
C.K. ABDUL REHIM,
JUDGE.
okb