Kerala HC Orders Probe Against Former DGP Siby Mathews For Allegedly Disclosing Identity Of Rape Victim In His Book 'Nirbhayam’
|The Kerala High Court has directed the police to proceed against former Director General of Police Siby Mathews who allegedly disclosed the identity of a rape victim in his book ‘Nirbhayam’.
A writ petition was filed by one KK Joshwa against the communication given by the District Police Chief refusing to take any further action in a case alleging offence under Section 228A of the India Penal Code, 1860.
The Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen observed, “However, it is well settled that the power of a constitutional court to order investigation is not taken away because of availability of alternative remedy in an appropriate case of this nature where the accused is none other than former DGP of the Kerala State. That apart, it is perceivable that Exts.P3 and P4 complaints were filed by the petitioner who worked along with the 4th respondent as Deputy Superintendent of Police, on 25.10.2019 and on 06.11.2019, the complaints not properly acted upon the last five years.”
Advocate Nandagopal S Kurup appeared for the Petitioner whereas Government Pleader Nima Jacob appeared for the Respondents.
A book named ‘Nirbhayam’ was written by Siby Mathews and published by Green Books. The Petitioner contended that in Pages Nos. 209 to 227 of the book, a chapter having the caption “Sooryanelli Case” is incorporated which relates to the rape of a minor girl by several accused persons in 1996.
It was alleged that the author of the book revealed the identity of the rape victim with exact details though her name was not specifically disclosed. Further, it was alleged that in the book, names, addresses and all the details of the parents of the victim were disclosed with certainty and thereby the Author has committed an offence punishable under Section 228A of the IPC.
The Court perused the preliminary enquiry final report and legal opinion of the Assistant Commissioner of Police and Director General of Prosecution and said that the reading of the book identifies the girl referred to as “peedippikkapetta penkutti” as a victim of rape was covered by Section 228A of the IPC, therefore, final report found to be without application of mind by the Investigating Officer and the same is liable to be set aside.
The Petitioner was aggrieved with the non-registration of the FIR even after he had approached the police officers with exhibits of the book. The Court relied on landmark judgments of the Supreme Court in Lalitha Kumari v. Govt of U.P.(2013 SC)and Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and Ors. (2008 SC). The Court also relied on its judgment in Don Paul v. State of Kerala (2024 Ker).
The Court held, “Therefore, the remedy of a person when his grievance, by filing or informing materials which would suggest a cognizable offence, if not acted upon by the Police Officer and the Police Superintendent is normally to approach the Magistrate seeking an investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. or else could approach the Magistrate for an enquiry permitted under Section 202 Cr.P.C. by filing a private complaint.”
Accordingly, the Court set aside the communication given by the District Police Chief and directed the Station House Officer to proceed forthwith.
Cause Title: KK Joshwa v. State of Kerala and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KER:40248)
Appearances:
Petitioner: Advocates Nandagopal S Kurup and Abhiram TK
Respondents: Government Pleader Nima Jacob and Advocate M Baiju Noel.