LAKSHMANA IPS RETD Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHEN violent naxalite activity was at its peak in Kerala, the death of a naxalite leader one Varghese took place on 18/2/197 0. He was allegedly wanted in some crimes. It was reported that his death occurred in an encounter with the police. Crime No. 28/70 of the Mananthavady Police Station was registered under the caption "unnatural death" and it was promptly closed after enquiry. After about three decades, consequent to the alleged disclosures made by a Police Constable who was allegedly involved in such an alleged encounter, public interest litigations were filed before this Court and by Ext. P2 order dated 27/1/1999 this Court directed the C. B. I. to register a crime and investigate. Thus, the F. I. R. was registered on 3/3/99. Investigation was conducted, completed and final report was filed on 11/12/200

(2.) COGNIZANCE was taken. At that stage, the 2nd accused who was charged sheeted came to this Court with this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution praying that the final report and all further proceedings may be quashed. It is, thus, that the matter is before this Court now. 2. The 1st accused is the Constable who allegedly made the confession and who allegedly shot the deceased at the instructions of accused 2 and 3. The 2nd accused was a young Deputy Superintendent of Police at the relevant point of time and the 3rd accused was the Superintendent of Police at the time in the District.

(3.) MY attention has been drawn to the relevant precedents on the subject. In particular, I have been taken through the decisions in Abdul rehman Antulay v. R. S. Nayak ( (1992) 1 SCC 225); Common Cause, a Registered society v. Union of India (1996) 4 SCC 33); Common Cause, a Registered Society ( (1996) 6 SCC 775); Raj Deo Sharma v. State of Bihar (AIR 1998 SC 3281); Raj deo Sharma v. State of Bihar (AIR 1999 SC 3524) and P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka ( (2002) 4 SCC 578 ).