R BALAKRISHNA PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. T. V. Prabhakaran and Mr. T. Ravikumar for the appellant; Mr. P. Gopalakrishnan Nair for the first respondent and Mr. Antony Dominic for the third respondent.

(2.) THIS Writ Appeal is directed against the judgment of c. S. Rajan, J. in OP 7862 of 1998 dated 15-6-1998 dismissing the Original petition filed by the appellant to quash Ext. P1 authorising Mr. Kallada sukumaran, Director General of Prosecution (third respondent herein) as Special public Prosecutor to conduct the prosecution in the Court of Special Judge at ernakulam in the cases charged in connection with Crime No. 455/cr/88 investigated into and charge-sheeted by the Special Squad for Idamalayar investigation, Trivandrum. The said appointment was made by the Government of kerala in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code')and in supersession of the Notification No. 18-507/ssa2/97/home dated 15-4-1997. The reason for quashing Ext. P1 has been stated as bitter animosity of Mr. Kallada Sukumaran against the appellant, Mr. R. Balakrishna Pillai, a former Minister under the Government of Kerala.

(3.) THE reason for filing the Original Petition and thereby to quash the order of appointment of the third respondent under Ext. P1 is the long standing enmity between the appellant, third respondent and one Mr. V. S. Achuthanandan. According to the appellant, he is very much aggrieved by the order appointing the third respondent to be in-charge of the prosecution as according to him, it is illegal and in violation of the provisions regarding appointment of Special Public Prosecutor. In support of his contention that there is ill-feeling and enmity between the appellant and the third respondent, the appellant has cited a few instances. THE first instance is the filing of an application as Cri. M. P. 64 of 1994 in CC 1 of 1991 for discharge (of the appellant) under Section 239 of the Code. THE said petition was posted for bearing. At that time, the third respondent filed a detailed objection on behalf of Mr. V. S. Achuthanandan, the then Opposition Leader, Kerala legislative Assembly and argued against the plea of discharge of the appellant. THE Special Judge considered the question whether a third party Mr. Achuthanandan can be allowed to intervene in the bearing of the case. He held that the, objection filed by the third party through the third respondent against the discharge of the appellant is entertainable and that the third party must be given an opportunity for being heard. Ext. P2 is the said order of the special Judge. THE order of the Special Judge was challenged in this court and this Court, by order dated 17-11-1994, held that a third party cannot be permitted to trespass into the region of the rights of the accused and, therefore, held that the Special Judge has committed an illegality in holding that an opportunity can be given to Mr. Achuthanandan for being heard. THE said judgment is reported in Balakrishna Pillai v. State of Kerala (1994 (2) KLT 1017) and marked as Ext. P3 herein. It is seen from Ext. P2 that Mr. Achuthanandan was being represented by the third respondent on different stages of the trial and before the Commission of Enquiry also. THErefore, it is said that the third respondent is a very interested person as far as the appellant is concerned to see that the appellant is convicted.