Subramaniyan Achari vs Chief Secretary

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 449 Ker
Judgement Date : 1 July, 2025

Kerala High Court

Subramaniyan Achari vs Chief Secretary on 1 July, 2025

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
                                                          2025:KER:47672


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                     PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

                         ST
        TUESDAY, THE 1        DAY OF JULY 2025 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1947


                              WP(C) NO. 2983 OF 2021

PETITIONER:

              SUBRAMANIYAN ACHARI
              AGED 67 YEARS
              S/O. CHELLAPPANACHARI, SANTHOSH BHVAN, AYANTHICHIRA,
              KOONIYOORMURY, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD VILLAGE,
              TRIVANDRUM 695 013

              BY ADV SRI.M.R.SARIN

RESPONDENTS:

    1         CHIEF SECRETARY
              GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

    2         DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
              POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, TRIVANDRUM 695 012

    3         M. MUHAMMED HUSSAIN,
              DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT VIGILANCE, KSEB VYDYUTHI BHAVAN,
              PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 004

    4         JAYARAJAN,
              SANGEETHA THEKKENDA, OLLUKARA P.O, THRISSUR 680 655

    5         N. MOHANAKRISHNAPRIYA
              IRATTAKULANGARA, MALAYINKEEZHU, TRIVANDRUM
              PIN- 695 571

              BY ADVS.
              SHRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN
              SMT.MINI GANGADHARAN

              SR PP SRI HRITHWIK C S

      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                        2025:KER:47672
WP(C) NO.2983 OF 2021

                                   2
                   P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                   --------------------------------
                   W.P (C) No.2983 of 2021
                    -------------------------------
              Dated this the 01st day of July, 2025


                             JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (C) is filed seeking the following relief:

a. " Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate order writ or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P5 order passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same.
b. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or such other writ, direction or orders directing the 1st respondent to grant sanction under section 197 of CrPC to the petitioner to prosecute the respondents 3 to 5."
[SIC]

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P5 order passed by the 1 st respondent, rejecting an application to get sanction to prosecute respondent Nos. 3 to 5 under Section 197 Cr.P.C. Petitioner is the complainant in CC No.862/2013 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kattakada. The respondent Nos. 3 to 5 are the accused persons in the above case. According to the petitioner, the accused persons committed the offence under Sections 323, 452, 426, 383, 384, 340, 191, 193 & 434 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that, CC No.862/2013 is still 2025:KER:47672 WP(C) NO.2983 OF 2021 3 pending before the Magistrate Court. During the pendency of the private complaint, the petitioner approached the 1 st respondent seeking sanction to prosecute the accused. The same was rejected as per Ext.P5. Aggrieved by the same, this Writ Petition is filed.

3. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor.

4. Notice was issued to the respondent Nos. 3 to 5. Notice was served to the respondent Nos. 3 and 5. Notice to the 4 th respondent is returned with an endorsement "could not find addressee". The impugned order in this case is an order rejecting an application for sanction. In view of the way in which this Writ Petition is going to be disposed of, I think, the notice to the 3 rd respondent can be dispensed with. If the 3 rd respondent is aggrieved by any of the directions in this judgment, the 3 rd respondent can file a review petition before this Court.

5. This Court perused Ext.P5 order. Ext.P2 is the application submitted by the petitioner for sanction. The contention raised by the petitioner in Ext.P2 is not adverted in Ext.P5. Ext.P5 is only a communication from the Chief Secretary to the petitioner. It is not a speaking order. According to me, Ext.P5 is to be set aside, and the matter is to be reconsidered by the 1 st 2025:KER:47672 WP(C) NO.2983 OF 2021 4 respondent. l make it clear that I have not considered the matter on merit and the 1st respondent is free to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, but only after adverting to the contentions raised by the petitioner in Ext.P2.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1. Ext.P5 is set aside.
2. The 1st respondent is directed to reconsider Ext.P2, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
3. The further proceedings in CC No.862/2013 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kattakada, shall be deferred for a period of six weeks.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SSG 2025:KER:47672 WP(C) NO.2983 OF 2021 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2983/2021 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CC NO. 862/13 PENDING BEFORE JFCM COURT KATTAKADA EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 10-01-2020 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF CMP NO. 3237/16 IN CC NO. 862/13 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER IN OP(CRL.) NO. 165/2020 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF ORDER ON 27-10-2020 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.