Kerala High Court
Abdul Jaleel vs Appunni.M.P on 15 October, 2018
Author: C.K.Abdul Rehim
Bench: C.K.Abdul Rehim
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 23RD ASWINA, 1940
WP(Crl.).No. 414 of 2018
PETITIONER:
ABDUL JALEEL
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O MAMMED KOYA, THIRUVOTH HOUSE, IRIKKUR P.O,
KOZHIKODE 673011
BY ADVS.
SRI.N.SURESH
SMT.SHEENAMOL VARGHESE
SRI.JACOB SAMUEL
SRI.P.BIJIMON
RESPONDENT/S:
1 APPUNNI.M.P
(D-SENIOR CPO 6012) POLICE ASSISTANT SUB
INSPECTOR (GRADE), BEPOOR POLICE STATION, NOW
WORKING WITH ECONOMIC OFFENCE WING(CRIME
BRANCH), RAM MOHAN ROAD , KOZHIKODE 673004
2 RAMESH BABU (CPO 8731)
CITY TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE, NOW
WORKING AT KASBA POLICE STATION PIN 673 002.
3 VISHNU KUMAR,
SENIOR CPO MARADU POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE,
NOW WORKING AT TOWN POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE
673 001
4 INSPECTOR OF POLICE
TOWN CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE
W.P.(Crl) No. 414/2018
-:2:-
5 THE COMMISSIONERE OF POLICE,
KOZHIKODE CITY, KOZHIKODE
6 THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
NORTHERN RANGE, KOZHIKODE
7 ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
OFFICE OF ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
KOZHIKODE
8 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
9 THE SECRETARY,
HOME DEPARTMENT, STATE OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.GP.SRI.K.B.RAMANAND
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 15.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(Crl) No. 414/2018
-:3:-
C.K. ABDUL REHIM,
&
R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, JJ.
-----------------------------------------------------
W.P.(Crl) No. 414 OF 2018 S
-------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of October, 2018
JUDGMENT
Abdul Rehim, J.
The petitioner is invoking jurisdiction vested on this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs;
"i. To issue a writ of habeas corpus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to cause the production of the body of the detenue who have been illegally arrested and taken into illegal custody on 24.12.2015 at around 7 a.m. from the premises of Kozhikode Railway Station by respondents 1 to 3 which is evident by Ext.P3 video footage and the admission in Ext.P5 statement before this W.P.(Crl) No. 414/2018 -:4:- Hon'ble Court on such day fixed by this Hon'ble court.
ii. To issue a writ of habeas corpus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents 4 to 9 to cause the production of the body of the detenue if he is still alive and kept in some secret hideouts at the instance of the respondents 1 to 3 or their henchmen.
iii. Such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the interest of justice."
2. Case of the petitioner is that, on 24.12.2015 he interfered in an incident which took place in front of the Railway Station at Kozhikode, when the respondents 1 to 3 attempted to take a man forcibly into custody in an auto-rickshaw, despite his stiff resistance. The petitioner made a demand to respondents 1 to 3 to show their identity cards or at least to ensure that the person apprehended is taken in a police jeep. When people gathered at the spot supported the petitioner, the respondents 1 to 3 were compelled to call for a police vehicle and the person W.P.(Crl) No. 414/2018 -:5:- apprehended was taken to the Police Station in the police vehicle. But quiet unexpectedly, the 2nd respondent gave a heavy blow on the cheek of the petitioner and he was also taken into custody along with the person apprehended; and was taken to the Police Station in the same vehicle. The respondents 1 to 3 had attacked and manhandled the petitioner inside the vehicle as well as in the Police Station. According to the petitioner, a young man around the age of 20 years, who was already there in the Station, had witnessed the brutal attack inflicted upon the petitioner. It is stated that, the petitioner had also witnessed the person apprehended (hereinafter referred to as 'the alleged detenue') being brutally manhandled by the respondents 1 to 3 and other policemen. The petitioner was released from the Police Station after the Circle Inspector had intervened in the matter. The petitioner took treatment at the Government General Hospital, Kozhikode on that day. He preferred a complaint to the Commissioner of Police regarding the above incident, on 28.12.2015. A crime was registered W.P.(Crl) No. 414/2018 -:6:- based on his complaint at the Town Police Station, Kozhikode, as Crime No.6/2016, under Sections 341, 323 and 506(i) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The said case was referred after investigation by the police and the petitioner had filed a private complaint in protest, which is now pending disposal before the Magistrate's court.
3. According to the petitioner, a CCTV footage recorded at the Railway Station, which contains the relevant portions of the incident is available with the petitioner. Copy of the CCTV footage is produced in a compact disc along with this writ petition, marked as Ext.P3. According to the petitioner, the only evidence which he can be produced before the Magistrate's court with respect to the alleged incident of attack on him, is the oral evidence of the alleged detenue and the young man, who were present in the Police Station on 24.12.2015 at the relevant time when the petitioner was attacked. It is stated that, in order to locate the alleged detenue as well as the young man, whose identity is not known to the petitioner, he made a request to get W.P.(Crl) No. 414/2018 -:7:- a copy of the 'General Diary' kept in the Police Station on the relevant date, which was issued to him. But on getting copy of the 'GD', it was revealed that, there was no entries made therein with respect to apprehension of the alleged detenue or the young man or the petitioner, on the said date. Copy of the relevant pages of the General Diary is also produced along with this writ petition, marked as Ext.P4.
4. Suspicion expressed by the petitioner is that, the alleged detenue might have been either murdered or secretly kept illegally in a place known only to the respondents 1 to 3; or that he might have been handed over to some 'mafia' gang headed by one 'Arshad Bhasha', who was also present at the relevant time in the Police Station. It is stated in the writ petition that, the respondents 1 to 3 had given statements in an inquiry conducted by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Kozhikode that the alleged detenue was taken into custody on the relevant date. Therefore the petitioner is seeking the reliefs as mentioned above.
W.P.(Crl) No. 414/2018-:8:-
5. We are of the considered opinion that the above writ petition is a totally misconceived. If the case of the petitioner is that, an unknown person was illegally taken into custody by the police forcefully on 24.12.2015, in violation of law and in violation of the settled procedure recommended for arrest of any person; and that the police had manipulated the relevant records like the General Diary kept at the police station, the remedy left to the petitioner is not to approach this court seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus. If the case of the petitioner is that the respondents are not revealing the identity of the alleged detenue and that of the young man, in order to facilitate the petitioner to site them as witnesses in the private complaint filed by him against the respondents, then also his remedy is not to approach this court in a Habeas Corpus writ petition. In the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking direction for commanding production of the corpus of an unknown person whose identity is not even known to the petitioner, with respect to whom he is only keeping a suspicion that respondents 1 to 3 W.P.(Crl) No. 414/2018 -:9:- might have murdered him or secretly kept him under illegal custody, since 24.12.2015.
6. Prima facie, there is no basis for the above said allegations, because the alleged incident took place as early as on 24.12.2015, more than 2½ years back. Further, it is evident that the specific stand of respondents 1 to 3 is that the alleged detenue, who was taken into custody on that day, was released on the same day itself. This court cannot issue a rule nisi for commanding production of the corpus of a person whose identity is not known. If the petitioner has got a case that the respondents 1 to 3 had acted illegally or in a highhanded manner, either in the matter of taking into custody of the alleged detenue or in the matter of attacking and manhandling the petitioner himself or that they have committed any criminal offences, he is left with efficacious remedies before the appropriate forum. The petitioner cannot be permitted to abuse the jurisdiction of this court in order to help him to collect evidence in his legal fight against the respondents 1 to 3. W.P.(Crl) No. 414/2018 -:10:-
7. From the circumstances as mentioned above, this court is not persuaded to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction vested on this court, which is discretionary in nature, to grant any of the reliefs sought for by the petitioner.
Consequently, the above writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed.
Sd/- C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.
Sd/- R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE.
ul/-
[True copy] P.S. to Judge.
W.P.(Crl) No. 414/2018-:11:- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 THE COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DOCTOR ATTACHED TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL HOSPITAL, KOZHIKODE EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF THE REFEER REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE C.I OF POLICE, TOWN POLICE STATION, KOZHODE EXHIBIT P3 THE COPY OF THE CD DISK CONTAINING THE RELEVANT PART OF THE INCIDENT OF TAKING THE DETENUE INTO AN ILLEGAL CUTODY BY RESPONDETNS 1 TO 3 IN PLAIN CLOTHES EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE GENERAL DIARY EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENTS OF RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 RECORDED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOZHIKODE WHICH IS FURNISHED TO THE PETITIONER UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT