Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The petitioner, a former Scientist of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) who has orbited the sun 74 times (it appears from record that he is aged 74 years now) continues his fight for justice with this writ petition for quashing Ext.P2 (G.O. (Rt) No.1923/2011/Home dated 29.06.2011) by which, the State Government has decided not to take any action against respondents 4 to 6, who investigated ISRO espionage case at the early stage of investigation. The petitioner alleges that Ext.P2 has added insult to his injury, as he lost not only his career, but also a considerable span of life, his savings, honour, academic work as well as self esteem through a witch-hunt commonly called 'ISRO spy case'.

8. The petitioner adds that respondents 4 to 6 fabricated and cooked up ISRO espionage for some other motive which has to be investigated also. The petitioner also points out that he strongly believes that it was an agenda for other nations that India should not develop Cryogenic Engine Technology which is clear from the fact that when USSR and India entered into an agreement for transfer of cryogenic technology, it was torpedoed by US threatening to apply sanctions against India and USSR. The petitioner points out that had cryogenic engine been developed during that period, India would have become a very strong contender of US in space technology. It is with this background, the petitioner has come up before this Court.

"Both the CBI and the accused-discharged persons approached the Hon'ble High Court against the action of Government of Kerala. However, the High Court upheld the action of the Government. Against this the CBI and the accused - discharged persons approached the Supreme Court through SLPs against the action of Government of Kerala.
In the meantime Government examined the case with reference to the views obtained from the State Police Chief on the observation of the CBI along with the explanation of the officers concerned. After examination it was decided to await the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the prayer of the CBI and the accused discharged persons questioning the notification issued by the Government withdrawing the consent given to the CBI to investigate into the espionage case and also to "further investigate" the ISRO espionage case and also directed to give Rs.1 Lakh each to the accused appellants as cost.

(iii) On 9.11.94, Mariyam Rasheeda disclosed about her contacts with accused Sasikumaran and Chandra Sekhar of Bangalore. Inspector Vijayan took no steps to question immediately either Sasikumaran or Chandra Sekhar and to confront them with Mariam Rasheeda so as to bring out the truth especially in the context of wide media coverage from 22.10.94 onwards alleging espionage activities.

(iv) The basis of his deduction that Mariyam Rasheeda and Fauzia Hassan had come to India for espionage purposes has not been brought out on record by him. During investigation, he did not collect any information about any particular espionage activity committed by the accused. Despite this, he preferred to lodge a report at PS Vanchiyoor on 13.11.94 that Mariyam Rasheeda and Fauzia Hassan had committed activities prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of the State. The main grounds mentioned in the FIR for allegation of espionage is that Mariyam Rasheeda contacted Sasikumaran several times and that she had made lot of entries in her diary which was seized by them. Verification of these telephone calls and a translation of the diary entries would have confirmed that they have nothing to do with ISRO or espionage. Without any verification, Inspr. Vijayan asked in haste to lodge an FIR on allegations of espionage. Inspector Vijayan, thus, acted in an unfair and unprofessional manner, thereby causing avoidable harassment and suffering to the accused persons.