Kerala High Court
Sreekumar vs State Of Kerala on 26 November, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 3817 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CMP NO.5705 OF 2016
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , KAYAMKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
1 SREEKUMAR
AGED 47 YEARS
CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKARA, S/O
PARAMESWARAN NAIR, SREEBHAVANAM, MARUTHOOR NORTH
MURI, KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, ALUMKADAVU P.O.,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690573
2 ANVAR E
AGED 42 YEARS
WORKING AT MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION, S/O EBRAHIM
PILLAI, VALIYAMARUTHAVANA, SOUTHKOCHU MURI,
KRISHNAPURAM VILLAGE, OACHIRA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
PIN - 690526
3 UNNIKRISHNAN
AGED 38 YEARS
WORKING AT MAVELIKARA POLICE, S/O GOPINATHAN PILLAI,
KUZHIYIL, PONAKAM MURI, THEKKEKKARA VILLAGE,
MAVELIKARA P.O.,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690101
4 RAHUL RAJ
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O RAJAN PILLAI, KANNAN BHAVANAM, VENGARA MURI,
THODIYOOR VILLAGE, THODIYOOR NORTH P.O.,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, WORKING AT
MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION., PIN - 690523
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
2
BY ADV SRI.S.K.SAJI
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 SREERAJ
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O RAJU, MELATHARA MADATHIL, KADUVINAL MURI,
KADUVINAL P.O., VALLIKUNNAM VILLAGE,, PIN - 690501
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.P.PRASANATH, PP
SHRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR
SMT.POOJA K.S.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.11.2025, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3818/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CMP NO.5703 OF 2016
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , KAYAMKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
1 SREEKUMAR
AGED 47 YEARS
CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKARA, AGED 47
YEARS, SREEBHAVANAM, MARUTHOOR NORTH MURI,
KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, ALUMKADAVU P.O., KOLLAM
DISTRICT,, PIN - 690573
2 ANVAR. E
AGED 42 YEARS
WORKING AT MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION, AGED 42 YEARS,
S/O EBRAHIM PILLAI, VALIYAMARUTHAVANA, SOUTHKOCHU
MURI, KRISHNAPURAM VILLAGE, OACHIRA, ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT., PIN - 690526
3 UNNIKRISHNAN
AGED 38 YEARS
WORKING AT MAVELIKARA POLICE, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O
GOPINATHAN PILLAI, KUZHIYIL, PONAKAM MURI,
THEKKEKKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKARA P.O.,ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT, PIN. 690101
4 RAHUL RAJ
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O RAJAN PILLAI, KANNAN BHAVANAM, VENGARA MURI,
THODIYOOR VILLAGE, THODIYOOR NORTH P.O.,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN 690523 WORKING
AT MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION.
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
4
BY ADV SRI.S.K.SAJI
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 ASHOK KUMAR @ VAVACHAN
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O SANKARA PILLAI, , SANKARA BHAVANAM, THALIRADI
MURI, KADUVINAL P.O.,VALLIKUNNAM VILLAGE, PIN 690501
BY ADVS.
SRI.SANAL P.RAJ, PP
SHRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR
SMT.POOJA K.S.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.11.2025, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3773/2022, 3782/2022 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 3773 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CMP NO.5704 OF 2016
OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KAYAMKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
1 SREEKUMAR
AGED 47 YEARS
CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKARA,
SREEBHAVANAM, MARUTHOOR NORTH MURI, KARUNAGAPPALLY
VILLAGE, ALUMKADAVU P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN -
690573
2 ANVAR E
AGED 42 YEARS
WORKING AT MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION, S/O EBRAHIM
PILLAI, VALIYAMARUTHAVANA, SOUTHKOCHU MURI,
KRISHNAPURAM VILLAGE, OACHIRA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.,
PIN - 690526
3 UNNIKRISHNAN
AGED 38 YEARS
WORKING AT MAVELIKARA POLICE, S/O GOPINATHAN PILLAI,
KUZHIYIL, PONAKAM MURI, THEKKEKKARA VILLAGE,
MAVELIKARA P.O.,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690101
4 RAHUL RAJ
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O RAJAN PILLAI, KANNAN BHAVANAM, VENGARA MURI,
THODIYOOR VILLAGE, THODIYOOR NORTH P.O.,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT WORKING AT
MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION., PIN - 690523
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
6
BY ADV SRI.S.K.SAJI
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 AJITH
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O SATHYAN, KALLIL KIZHAKETHIL, SOUTH MURI,
VALLIKUNNAM VILLAGE, VALLIKUNNAM P.O.,, PIN - 690501
BY ADVS.
SMT.SEETHA S., SR.PP
SHRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR
SMT.POOJA K.S.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.11.2025, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3818/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 3782 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CMP NO.5707 OF 2016
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , KAYAMKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
1 SREEKUMAR
AGED 47 YEARS
CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKARA, S/O
PARAMESWARAN NAIR, SREEBHAVANAM, MARUTHOOR NORTH
MURI, KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, ALUMKADAVU P.O.,
KOLLAM DISTRICT,, PIN - 690573
2 ANVAR E
AGED 42 YEARS
WORKING AT MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION, S/O EBRAHIM
PILLAI, VALIYAMARUTHAVANA, SOUTHKOCHU MURI,
KRISHNAPURAM VILLAGE, OACHIRA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.,
PIN - 690526
3 UNNIKRISHNAN
AGED 38 YEARS
WORKING AT MAVELIKARA POLICE, S/O GOPINATHAN PILLAI,
KUZHIYIL, PONAKAM MURI, THEKKEKKARA VILLAGE,
MAVELIKARA P.O.,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,, PIN - 690101
4 RAHUL RAJ
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O RAJAN PILLAI, KANNAN BHAVANAM, VENGARA MURI,
THODIYOOR VILLAGE, THODIYOOR NORTH P.O.,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, WORKING AT
MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION., PIN - 690523
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
8
BY ADV SRI.S.K.SAJI
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 SARATH LAL
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O ASHOKAN, SANTHALAYAM, MANAPPALLIY WEST MURI,
MANAPPALLY P.O.,PAVUMBA VILLAGE, PIN - 690574
BY SMT.SEETHA S., SR.PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.11.2025, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3818/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 3894 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CMP NO.5706 OF 2016
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , KAYAMKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
1 SREEKUMAR,
AGED 47 YEARS
CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKARA, S/O.
PARAMESWARAN NAIR, SREEBHAVANAM, MARUTHOOR NORTH
MURI, KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, ALUMKADAVU P.O.,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690573
2 ANVAR E.,
AGED 42 YEARS
WORKING AT MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION, S/O EBRAHIM
PILLAI, VALIYAMARUTHAVANA, SOUTHKOCHU MURI,
KRISHNAPURAM VILLAGE, OACHIRA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
PIN - 690526
3 UNNIKRISHNAN,
AGED 38 YEARS
WORKING AT MAVELIKARA POLICE, S/O. GOPINATHAN
PILLAI, KUZHIYIL, PONAKAM MURI, THEKKEKKARA VILLAGE,
MAVELIKARA P.O.,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690101
4 RAHUL RAJAN,
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O. RAJAN PILLAI, KANNAN BHAVANAM, VENGARA
MURI,THODIYOOR VILLAGE, THODIYOOR NORTH P.O.,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT , WORKING AT
MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION., PIN - 690523
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
10
BY ADV SRI.S.K.SAJI
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THOOFAN THULASI,
AGED 34 YEARS
S/O. THULASEEDHARAN, MALARI THEKKETHIL, KADUVINAL
MURI, KADUVINAL P.O., VALLIKUNNAM VILLAGE, PIN -
690501
BY SMT.SEETHA S., SR.PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.11.2025, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3818/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:91134
CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases
11
C.S.DIAS,J.
====================
Crl.M.C.Nos.3817, 3818, 3773, 3782 & 3894 of 2022
------------------------------------ --
Dated this the 26th day of November, 2025
COMMON ORDER
As these Criminal Miscellaneous Cases are filed assailing the common order in CMP Nos.5703, 5704, 5705, 5706 and 5707 of 2016 in C.C.No.15 of 2019 passed by the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kayamkulam ('Trial Court', in short), taking cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as against the petitioners, these Crl.M.Cs. are disposed of by this common order.
2. Crime No.535 of 2016 is registered by the Vallikunnam Police Station against the five accused persons (2nd respondent in each Crl.M.C., hereinafter referred to as 'complainants', for brevity) for allegedly 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 12 committing the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 151, 153 and 506(ii) read with Section 149 of the IPC and Section 27(2) read with Section 7 of the Arms Act. The complainants were arrested on 01.08.2016 - 02.08.2016 and were taken into police custody. Alleging that the complainants were subjected to custodial torture, they filed the above CMPs., against the petitioners, who are all police officers, who subjected the complainants to custodial torture and, thus, have committed the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The learned Magistrate, by the impugned common order, after examining the petitioner in CMP No.5703 of 2016, prima facie, concluded that the petitioners have subjected the complainants to custodial torture. As the offences were allegedly committed not in discharge of the official duty, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC and numbered the case as 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 13 C.C.No.15 of 2019, and issued summons to the petitioners. The impugned common order is erroneous and wrong. Hence, these Crl.M.Cs.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent in Crl.M.C.Nos.3817, 3818 and 3773 of 2022.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contends that, the complainants were subjected to medical examination before they were produced before the Magistrate and none of them suffered any injury. Similarly, the complainants did not complain about custodial torture to the learned Magistrate. Furthermore, it was solely on the basis of the sworn statement of the complainant in CMP No.5703 of 2016, that cognizance of the offences were taken in the five complaints by the common order, and one case has been registered. There is no material to arrive at a conclusion 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 14 that the complainants were subjected to custodial torture. Therefore, the offences under Sections 323 and 324 are not attracted. The learned counsel also contends that, as the complainants were in police custody in Crime No.535 of 2016, the alleged action of the petitioners were only in discharge of their official duties. The learned counsel relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Manjunath G.C. and others v. Seetaram [(2025) 5 SCC 390] in support of his contention that, even if there is any police excess, the same can only fall within the discharge of their official functions. Therefore, sanction for prosecution is mandatory. According to him, none of the contentions were considered by the Trial Court. Hence, the common order may be quashed.
5. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondents in the three cases opposes the Crl.M.Cs. She submits that since the petitioners have brutally assaulted the complainants while they were in police custody, the same does not fall 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 15 within the purview of discharge of official duties. She relies on the decision of this Court in Arunkumar A. v. State of Kerala [2025 KHC OnLine 10662] to substantiate her contention. She prays that the Crl.M.Cs. may be dismissed.
6. The complainants filed separate complaints alleging that each one of them were taken in police custody between 01.08.2016 and 02.08.2016 and were subjected to custodial torture, and they suffered hurt.
7. A reading of the common order substantiates that all the complainants were produced before the Government Hospital, Mavelikkara and, thereafter, before the jurisdictional Magistrate.
8. Admittedly, the complainants did not raise any complaint either before the Doctor or before the jurisdictional Magistrate regarding custodial torture. It is, thereafter, that they submitted the complaints before the Magistrate and the common order has been passed.
2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 16
9. A reading of the common order demonstrates that, only the statement of the complainant in CMP No.5703 of 2016 was recorded, who testified that he was subjected to custodial torture. It is based on the said sole oral testimony, that the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences in respect of the five complaints, as against the petitioners and numbered the case as C.C.No.15 of 2019. There is no other material to prima facie establish that the complainants have suffered any hurt or injury.
8. In Manjunath G.C.'s case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court, after considering the earlier decision in Virupaxappa Veerappa Kadampur v. State of Mysore [AIR 1963 SC 849] and the decision in D.Devaraja v. Owais Sabeer Hussain [(2020) 7 SCC 695], has held that, if a police officer, in the course of performing official duties, exceeds his bounds of such duty, the protective shield under the relevant statutory provisions continues to 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 17 apply, provided there exists a reasonable nexus between the impugned act and the discharge of the official functions. Furthermore, the transgression or overstepping of authority does not, by itself, suffice to displace the statutory safeguard of requiring prior Government sanction before prosecuting the public servant concerned.
9. On the contrary, this Court in Arunkumar's case (supra), after relying on the earlier precedents on the point, has held that necessity of sanction depends on whether the alleged acts were committed in bona fide discharge of official duties, which is examined at the stage of the proceedings based on evidence. A mere allegation that the act was in the discharge of official duty does not confer automatic protection under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
10. Going by the principles laid down in the aforesaid decisions and the fact that the Trial Court has proceeded against the petitioners only on the basis of the oral 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 18 testimony of the complainant in CMP No.5703 of 2016, without any other supporting material, I am of the definite view that the learned Magistrate is to be directed to reconsider the matter afresh, after considering the principles laid down in the afore-referred precedents, the materials on record, and after affording the petitioners and the complainants an opportunity of being heard.
In the aforesaid circumstances, these Crl.M.Cs. are allowed. Annexure A2 common order is hereby quashed. The Trial Court is directed to reconsider the complaints, in accordance with law, after affording the petitioners and the complainants (2nd respondents in the Crl.M.Cs.) an opportunity of being heard. The above exercise shall be carried out, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, untramelled by any observation in this order.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE dkr 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 19 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3818/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN THE MAIN CASE AS CMP NO. 5703/2016 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAYAMKULAM Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 06.08.2016 Annexure A3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN CMP.
5703/2016 DATED 05.01.2019 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAYAMKULAM 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 20 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3773/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 06.08.2016 Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN CMP 5703/2016 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAYAMKULAM DATED 05.01.2019 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 21 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3782/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 06.08.2016 Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN CMP 5703/2016 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAYAMKULAM DATED 05.01.2019 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 22 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3817/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 06.08.2016 Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN CMP 5705/2016 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAYAMKULAM DATED 05.01.2019 2025:KER:91134 CRL.MC NO. 3818 OF 2022 & conn.cases 23 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3894/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 06.08.2016 Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN CMP 5703/2016 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAYAMKULAM DATED 05.01.2019