Kerala High Court on Thursday ordered to keep in abeyance for two weeks, further proceedings on a complaint before the Kannur Judicial First Class Magistrate court regarding the alleged manhandling of Governor Arif Muhammad Khan in December 2019.
When the case came up for hearing, the court asked whether any case had been registered in connection with the incident. The state government submitted that no case was registered and there was no complaint received in this regard.
This is while considering a petition seeking to set aside the order of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court at Kannur to not direct any investigation into the alleged manhandling against the Kerala Governor during a program at Kannur University. The petitioner, Adv KV Manoj Kumar sought directions to conduct investigation into the matter.
In the petition, he alleged that “since the alleged criminal conspiracy was hatched in Delhi as disclosed by the Governor, a detailed and proper investigation into the case is indispensable to book the culprits who worked behind the larger conspiracy. It is very evident that mere inquiry into the case by examining witnesses would be of no use at all.”
“Hence the order of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court for recording the statement of the petitioner and other witnesses under section 202 of the CrPC would be an exercise in futility. The petitioner was not an eyewitness to the alleged incident but had made the complaint to set the criminal law in motion in public spirit. Any person could set the criminal law in motion since the incident at the 80th History Congress was a crime against society posing danger to public order,” he added.
The petition further said that the police, even without recording the statement of the Governor, and his ADC whose shirt was torn by the protestors, arrived at the conclusion that no investigation is required.
“It is very pertinent to note that the police arrived at a conclusion even without recording the statement of either the Governor or his ADC whose dress was torn by the aggressive protestors. Even for examining the Governor before the court, it would not be possible to secure his attendance in light of the constitutional bar under article 361 of the Constitution and section 133(1)(vi) of the CrPC,” the petition stated.
It went on to state that the Magistrate committed a “grave error” in not ordering an investigation into the alleged offence of manhandling of a constitutional functionary of the stature of the Governor and passed an order for recording the sworn statement in a “casual manner”, merely on the “whims and fancy of the court”, which would “tantamount to a miscarriage of justice”.
This report is filed by ANI news service. TheNewsMill holds no responsibility for this content.