Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Friday came down heavily on the police over lapses in the arrest of the prime accused in the Nithin Raj suicide case, questioning the supervising officer on how such procedural failures were allowed in a sensitive investigation.
Justice A. Badharudeen questioned Deputy Superintendent of Police (DySP) Sudheer Kallan over the shortcomings in the arrest of Dr M. Kodanda Ram, a professor at Kannur Dental College and the prime accused in the case.
The court reminded the officer that investigations in sensitive cases should leave no room for procedural lapses that could ultimately benefit the accused.
“In such a sensitive case, there should be no loopholes in the investigation or arrest that would enable the accused to escape the clutches of law,” the court observed while asking the DySP what supervisory role he had played during the investigation.
The court went a step further, asking whether the lapses were deliberate.
“Is this an attempt to tarnish the Home Department, which is doing many good things, including Operation Toofan? Do you want to take revenge on the government?” Justice Badharudeen asked.
The DySP replied, “Nothing like that, Your Lordship.”
The court was hearing a petition filed by Nithin Raj’s parents seeking clarity on the Supreme Court’s directions that the grounds of arrest must be communicated to an accused at the time of arrest.
Dr Kodanda Ram was initially arrested in connection with the death of Nithin Raj, a Dalit dental student who allegedly died by suicide after facing caste-based harassment.
However, a trial court declared the arrest illegal after finding that the police had failed to furnish the grounds of arrest as mandated by law.
The professor was later rearrested after the procedural defect was rectified. During Friday’s hearing, the High Court repeatedly questioned the investigating officer on how such a basic lapse had occurred.
“How many arrests have you made as a DySP? You have given grounds of arrest in other cases. Why was it omitted in this case?” the judge asked.
The court reminded the officer that his duty was to conduct a fair and impartial investigation and not to protect either side.
“You cannot protect any accused by such acts. Do your duty honestly. Your responsibility is to ensure justice to both the victim and the accused through a fair investigation,” the court observed.
The High Court also reminded the Public Prosecutor that it had earlier called for disciplinary proceedings against the officers responsible for the lapses.
It said it would await the outcome of those proceedings before taking up the matter again after two weeks.
(IANS)
