Kerala HC Seeks State's Response On Plea Against Leakage Of Kerala Police's Data About RSS And BJP Leaders
The Kerala High Court on Monday sought the response from the State of Kerala on a plea seeking a full-fledged investigation into the matter of leaking of confidential information relating to workers and leaders of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Bharatiya Janatha Party (BJP) in Thodupuzha of Kerala.
Justice K. Haripal has adjourned the case by two weeks to enable the Public Prosecutor to get instructions.
The Writ Petition was filed by Suresh Kumar K. S., the District President of BJP in Idukki District through Advocates K.R. Rajkumar and Jagadeesh Lakshman.
The Kerala Police discovered that sensitive information had been leaked from their database while examining the mobile phone of an accused in a case relating to an attack on a bus conductor in Thodupuzha, allegedly for blasphemy. It is alleged that the accused in that case are connected to SDPI, the political wing of the Popular Front of India (PFI).
After enquiry, the District Police Chief of Idukki District transferred one Anas PK, a Civil Police Officer, allegedly the person who leaked the sensitive information to SDPI workers.
The news about the leaking of information came out close to the murder of Advocate Ranjith Sreenivasan, a BJP leader, allegedly by SDPI workers. The murder happened within hours of the Murder of the State Secretary of the SDPI and allegedly in retaliation thereto.
The Petitioner contends in the Writ Petition that apart from initiating a departmental enquiry against one officer involved, the Police have not taken any concrete action in the matter.
The Petitioner cites alleged earlier instances of "Islamists infiltration into the police force", including reports about existence of "Pachavelicham", a whatsapp group of Muslim police officers in the state.
The Petitioner submits that the "matter requires serious consideration by the Home Department and a local investigation by a low-ranking officer will not suffice".
The Petitioner also submits that the provisions of Sections 6, 43, 65 and 66 of IT Act 2000 and Section 420, 379 and 408 of the IPC ought to have been invoked in the case.
"Public Prosecutor seeks time to get instructions. Post after two weeks", the Court ordered on Monday.
