Kerala High Court
K.A. Sabu,S/O.K.A. Antony, Sub ... vs State Of Kerala ,Represented By The ... on 2 November, 2024
Author: A.Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
2024:KER:80951
1
OP(KAT) No.397 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
SATURDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024/11TH KARTHIKA,
1946
OP(KAT) NO. 397 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 08.08.2024 IN OA
NO.1619 OF 2022 OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER/JUDGMENT
DATED 08.08.2024 IN OA NO.1619 OF 2022 OF KERALA
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONERS:
1 K.A. SABU,S/O.K.A. ANTONY, SUB INSPECTOR OF
POLICE, AGED 51 YEARS
(UNDER SUSPENSION) NEDUMKANDAM POLICE STATION,
IDUKKI, KERALA- 685553 , RESIDING AT
KURUPPASSERY HOUSE, NJARAKKAL P.O, PERUMPILLY,
ERNAKULAM, KERALA-682505
2 REJIMON C.B,AGED 53 YEARS
S/O. BHASKARAN, ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR OF
POLICE (1885),(UNDER SUSPENSION) NEDUMKANDAM
POLICE STATION, IDUKKI, KERALA- 685553 ,
RESIDING AT NAVAMI HOUSE, BLOCK NO.112, KALLAR
P.O, BALAGRAM, IDUKKI, KERALA, PIN - 685552
3 NIYAS.S,AGED 39 YEARS
S/O. SAIDU HASSAN, (DVR CPO 4598),(UNDER
2024:KER:80951
2
OP(KAT) No.397 of 2024
SUSPENSION) DISTRICT HEADQUARTER, IDUKKI,
KERALA-685602, RESIDING AT PUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE,
CHOTTUPARA P.O, THOOKUPALAM, IDUKKI, KERALA,
PIN - 685552
4 SAJEEV ANTONY,AGED 47 YEARS
S/O. ANTONY JOSEPH, SENIOR CIVIL POLICE OFFICER
(3450), (UNDER SUSPENSION), ARMED RESERVE CAMP,
IDUKKI, KERALA- 685552, RESIDING AT
MULANGASSERIL HOUSE, NEDUMKANDAM P.O,
MANJAPETTY, IDUKKI, KERALA, PIN - 685553
BY ADVS.
T.R.RAJESH
NANDANA SASI
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA ,REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL
CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME & VIGILANCE
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695001
2 THE STATE POLICE CHIEF,
OFFICE OF THE STATE POLICE CHIEF, POLICE
HEADQUARTERS, VASZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695014
3 THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
KOCHI RANGE, OFRFRICE OF THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR
GENERAL OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, KERALA,
PIN - 682031
4 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, IDUKKI, OFFICE OF
THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, IDUKKI, KERALA, PIN
- 685612
5 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE/ENQUIRY
OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF
POLICE, NMUVATTUPUZHA, KERALA-686661.
SRI. A.J.VARGHESE, SR.GP
2024:KER:80951
3
OP(KAT) No.397 of 2024
THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING COME
UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:80951
4
OP(KAT) No.397 of 2024
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2024
P.M. MANOJ, J.
The Original Petition is preferred being aggrieved by
the order dated 08.08.2024 whereby the Tribunal declined to
interfere with the prolonged suspension of the petitioners
herein.
2. The short facts relevant for consideration of this
original petition are as follows:
3. Petitioners are police personnel, who are
undergoing suspension in connection with their involvement
in a criminal case alleging custodial death. Originally, the
petitioners were suspended from service by order dated
26.06.2019 due to the alleged involvement in a custodial
death case. Even more than five years lapsed from the
original date of suspension, still the Suspension Review
Committee keep on extending their period of suspension.
4. It is the contention of the petitioners that the
allegation in the departmental proceedings as well as the
2024:KER:80951
allegation in the criminal case is one and the same and the
documents relied on and the witnesses in both the
proceedings are one and the same. Later, the investigation
was entrusted with CBI and they filed final report as early as
on 30.12.2020.
5. It is further stated, the departmental proceeding
is also nearing completion. However, there is no change in
the status of the petitioners with respect to their suspension,
which has been continuously extended. Hence, they
approached the Tribunal by filing OA No.1619 of 2022
seeking reinstatement in service.
6. In fact, the petitioners approached the Tribunal by
preferring two more Original Applications, challenging the
initiation of disciplinary proceedings before concluding the
criminal case and seeking for a direction to the enquiry officer
to permit them to recall and reexamine two witnesses in the
departmental enquiry. All these Original Applications were
heard together and passed a common judgment.
7. In the case on hand, the Original Petotopm
pertains only to O.A.No.1619 of 2022, wherein they sought
2024:KER:80951
for reinstatement in service.
8. The Tribunal considered the question raised with
respect to the prolonged period of suspension. For that
purpose, the Tribunal considered the facts involved in the
case, which pertains to a custodial death of One Rajkumar on
21.06.2019, while the petitioners were working in Peerumedu
Police Station, Idukki District. It was a sensational case and
the petitioners were suspended from service. The Deputy
Superintendent of Police, Narcotic Cell was appointed as
enquiry officer to enquire into the allegations and to submit
the PR Minutes. Simultaneously, FIR was registered and the
petitioners were implicated as accused in Crime No. 349 of
2019 of Peerumedu Police Station. Later, it was transferred to
Crime Branch. Thereafter, CBI took over the investigation
from the Crime Branch and submitted their final report before
the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam.
9. The petitioners contended before the Tribunal that
there is absolutely no justification for keeping them under
suspension in the circumstances that, already CBI has filed
final report before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate.
2024:KER:80951
10. This was objected by the respondents by
narrating the circumstances, which necessitated the
continued suspension of petitioners. In that regard, it was
pointed out that the relatives of the deceased Rajkumar had
approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 19978/2019
seeking a direction to investigate the case by CBI and the
investigation was entrusted to CBI and FIR was registered on
24.01.2020. After the investigation, final report was filed
before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Ernakulam, wherein the
petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos. 1 to 4.
11. In response to that, the petitioners produced
Annexures A18 to A20 to convince the Tribunal that many
delinquent employees in similar cases were reinstated and
seeking for the benefit of such order in their case. The
tribunal directed the learned Government Pleader to make
available the relevant orders and executive instructions that
governs the review of suspension and also details regarding
Suspension Review Committee held so far. It is further
directed to get reasons for not reviewing the suspension of
the applicants. It is also sought for a clarification with
2024:KER:80951
respect to the alleged discrimination meted out to the
petitioners in comparison with similarly situated delinquent
employees, whose suspension was reviewed and were
reinstated.
12. The said direction was complied by preferring a
reply statement dated 29.07.2024, in which it is specifically
stated that on the direction of the State Police Chief, the
Suspension Review Committee reviewed the suspension on
the ground of custodial death on different occasions and
decided to extend the period of suspension. It is further
clarified that in Annexures A18 to A21, reinstatement was
given to some persons as the investigation was almost
completed. But immediately after reinstatement to those
delinquents, the present incident occurred in the same range.
So the reinstatement of the petitioners herein will give a
wrong message even to the police personnel. It is further
stated that the suspension of the petitioners being reviewed
regularly in every quarter of year ever since their suspension.
In 2024 alone, the suspension of the petitioners was reviewed
on 20.02.2024 and 24.05.2024 and considered that the
2024:KER:80951
allegations were very grave in nature and the Committee
recommended the continuance of suspension. The orders of
the Review Committee were also produced before the
Tribunal wherein the reinstatement is not recommended.
13. In such report, it is also stated, no efforts are
taken by the petitioners for expediting the disposal of the
criminal case, though report was filed by CBI as early as in
2020. It is further stated, the enquiry report has not been
submitted by the Enquiry Officer.
14. On considering the findings, the learned counsel
for the petitioners argued that no valid reason is assigned in
suspension review orders, which are produced along with
Ext.P8 additional reply statement in this original petition. The
said orders are Annexures R3(c) and R3(d). These
documents reveal that no sufficient reason is assigned for
extending the period of suspension except stating that
considering the gravity of the allegation and the fact that PR
minutes have not been received after the oral enquiry, the
committee recommended to continue the suspension against
the delinquents. It appears to be the reason in Exts.R3(c)
2024:KER:80951
and (d) for reconsidering continuance of suspension is one
and the same.
15. The learned Senior Government Pleader, who
vehemently opposed the Original Petition, argued by inviting
our attention to the charges levelled against each officers
which describe their independent role in the alleged custodial
death, which is certainly disturbing.
16. However, on appreciating those facts, we do not
feel, that may not be a reason for extension of suspension.
Suspension is imposed only for facilitating an enquiry, dehors
the influence of such delinquent officers of such incident. In
the case on hand, CBI submitted their report before the
competent Court of law and the PR minutes also submitted.
Even on admitting the contention of the learned Senior
Government Pleader, the disciplinary proceedings are delayed
only on the interdiction orders caused by the petitioners, we
do not find that any sufficient reason is assigned by the
Suspension Review Committee in recommending the
continuation of suspension as available in Annexure R3(c)
and R3 (d) filed along with Ext.P8 additional reply statement.
2024:KER:80951
In fact, the reason stated in both the Suspension Review
Committee proceedings is one and the same, which is quoted
as follows:
"Considering the gravity of the allegations and
the fact that the PR minutes have not been received
after the Oral enquiry, the Committee recommended
continuing the suspension against these delinquents."
17. On considering the above, it appears that the
Tribunal has not considered this factum properly, which was
the situation the Tribunal had to weigh while deciding not to
interfere with the orders of suspension. The orders passed by
the Suspension Review Committee appear to be on non-
application of mind. Under such circumstances, it is decided
to interfere with the impugned order dated 08.08.2024 in OA
1619 to the extent it declines to interfere with the extension
of suspension and dismisses OA No. 1619 of 2022.
18. Accordingly, the impugned order dated
08.08.2024 in OA No. 1619 of 2024 is set aside. The
competent authority is directed to reinstate the petitioners in
service with immediate effect and place them in non-sensitive
post outside the District. The consequential decision with
2024:KER:80951
respect to the period of suspension shall be taken only after
conclusion of disciplinary proceedings initiated against them.
The Original Petition is allowed as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE,
JUDGE
sd/-
P.M. MANOJ,
JUDGE
das
2024:KER:80951
APPENDIX OF OP(KAT) 397/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 : TRUE COPY OF THE FIR BEARING
NO.0349/2019 DATED 21.06.2019 OF
PEERMEDU POLICE STATION
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF SUSPENSION
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEARING
ORDER NO.A2(A)-10458/2019/ER DATED
26.06.2019
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR REGISTERED IN THE
CRIME BRANCH POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AS FIR NO.0390/2019
DATED 27.06.2019
Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER
NO.A2(A)10458/2019/ER DATED 06.08.2019
Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF CHARGE MEMO AND STATEMENT
OF ALLEGATION SERVED ON THE 1ST
APPLICANT VIDE NO.08/PR/NCA/2019 DATED
04.09.2019 SERVED ON THE 1ST APPLICANT
Annexure A6 TRUE COPY OF CHARGE MEMO AND STATEMENT
OF ALLEGATION SERVED ON THE 2ND
APPLICANT VIDE NO.08/PR/NCA/2019 DATED
04.09.2019 SERVED ON THE 1ST APPLICANT
Annexure A7 : TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE MEMO AND
STATEMENT OF ALLEGATION SERVED ON THE
3RD APPLICANT VIDE NO.08/PR/NCA/2019
DATED 04.09.2019 SERVED ON THE 1ST
APPLICANT
Annexure A8 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE MEMO AND
STATEMENT OF ALLEGATION SERVED ON THE
4TH APPLICANT VIDE NO.08/PR/NCA/2019
DATED 04.09.2019 SERVED ON THE 1ST
APPLICANT
2024:KER:80951
Annexure A9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED
BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD
APPLICANT BEARING NO.3/PR/22-MS DATED
30.08.2022
Annexure A10 : TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT/CHARGE
SHEET BEARING NO.VNG/1/20/CBI/SCB/TVPM
DATED 30.12.2020
Annexure A11 : TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER OF THIS
HON'BLE TRIBUNAL DATED 06.10.2021 IN
Annexure A12 TRUE COPY OF GO(RT).3432/2021/HOME
DATED 13.12.2021
Annexure A13 TRUE COPY OF GO(RT)NO.365/2022/HOME
DATED 11.02.2022
Annexure A14 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST APPLICANT BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 23.08.2022
Annexure A15 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND APPLICANT BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 23.08.2022
Annexure A16 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD APPLICANT BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 23.08.2022
Annexure A17 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH T APPLICANT
BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED
23.08.2022
Annexure A18 TRUE COPY OF THE REINSTATEMENT ORDER
PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE
ORDER NO.A2(A)-6779/2018/KOR DATED
26.12.2018
Annexure A19 TRUE COPY OF THEREINSTATEMENT ORDER
2024:KER:80951
PASSED BY THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, CITY POLICE
OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM VIDE ORDER
NO.H2-20318/2018/TC DATED 30.11.2020
Annexure A20 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE
DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS AND
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES VIDE ORDER
NO.E2-23377/2020/PRHQ DATED 06.05.2021
Annexure A21 : TRUE COPY OF THEORDER ISSUED BY THE
COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE VIDE ORDER
NO.EXC/5413/19/X.E4. DATED 11.06.2021
Annexure A22 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE
NO.H3/84/2022.HOME DATED 03.03.2023
Annexure A23 TRUE COPY OF ORDER PASSED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT BEARING ORDER
NO.A2(A)/3366/2023/ER DATED 20.05.2023
Annexure A24 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING
NO.A2(A)-3366/2023/ER .DATED
11.08.2023 SSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
Annexur A22 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED
BY THE 5TN RESPONDENT AND ADDRESSED TO
THE LST APPLICANT BEARING NO.3/PR/22-
MS DATED 09.12.2022
Annexure R3(a) TRUE COPY OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE
NO.19/2018 DATED 21.04.2018 ISSUED BY
THE 2 RESPONDENT
Annexure R3(b) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NUMBER
GI(A)/12314/2017 DATED21.8.2019 ISSUED
BY THE2ND RESPONDENT
Annexure R3(c) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NOA2(A)333/2024/ER
DATED27.02.2024 ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT
2024:KER:80951
Annexure R3(d) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NOA2(A)-
333/2024/ERDATED28.05.2024ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P1 . TRUE COPY OF THE O.A.1619/2022 ALONG
WITH ITS ANNEXURES FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL
Exhibit P2 . TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT
FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN
OA.1619/2022 DATED 20.10.2022
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED
ON BEHALF OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED
Exhibit P4 . TRUE COPY OF THE ADOPTION MEMO FILED
BY THE GOVT.PLEADER DATED 09.05.2023
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER FILED BY
THE APPLICANTS DATED 12.12.2022 TO THE
REPLY STATEMENT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER FILED BY
THE APPLICANTS DATED 12.12.2022 TO THE
REPLY STATEMENT OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7 . TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL
REJOINDER FILED BY THE APPLICANTS
DATED 21.06.2024
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL REPLY
STATEMENT FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
DATED 29.07.2024
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THE
TRIBUNAL DATED 08.08.2024 IN
OA.1619/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES
