Walayar Rape-Death | Kerala HC Dismisses Plea By Victims' Mother Challenging Integrity Certificate Granted To SP Over Allegedly Faulty Probe

Justice CS Dias observed that the State Government's home department had considered the matter in detail before issuing Integrity Certificate to Sojan. It said,

"On a careful consideration of the facts, the materials on record, the observations of this Court in Ext.P2 judgment and the reasoning in Ext.P4 order, this Court does not find any ground or material to hold that Ext.P4 order or the decision-making process is actuated with malice or malafides. The 4th respondent (home department) in its wisdom, after considering the matter in detail, has decided to issue the Integrity Certificate to the 5th respondent (Sojan). This Court finds no illegality or arbitrariness in Ext.P4 order warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India". 

Background

In the Walayar case, two sisters, aged 13 and 9 years, belonging to the Scheduled Case community, were found hanging in their one-room house on separate days within a span of 3 months in 2017. Post-mortem reports disclosed that they were subjected to rape before their deaths. The post-mortem report of the younger girl even suggested the possibility of homicidal hanging.The Special POCSO Court acquitted all the accused in 2019. The Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the allegation. The Court also noticed the absence of scientific evidence.

The details of the judgment by the Special POCSO Court, Palakkad can be read here, here and here.

The victim's mother had alleged that the shabby investigation led by M. J. Sojan who was a Deputy Superintendent of Police at that time led to the acquittal. In 2021 the  High Court, after noting that there were lapses on the part of the investigators and prosecutors, had ordered a re-trial. 

Later, the investigation of the case was handed over to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

Meanwhile the State Government had issued Integrity Certificate in favour of the officer after the High Court passed an order in August 2023 directing the State Government to consider the issuance of Integrity Certificate and look into all necessary circumstances including the norms in this regard. The division bench of the high court had then held that as per the rules, the certificate cannot be withheld merely because criminal proceedings were pending against the officer.

During this time, the girls' mother had filed a petition before the High Court against granting of Integrity Certificate. The High Court had directed the State to consider her objections.

The State (Home department), in its August 18 order, after considering the representation concluded that the petitioner had not produced any substantial evidence warranting to revoke the Certificate. Against this order, the petitioner moved the high court in the present petition. 

The mother contended that the order of the Government was superficial and without considering her objections. She argued the Division Bench had earlier deprecated the lackadaisical investigation conducted by Sojan in the crime registered in connection with the death of the petitioner's daughters. Secondly, she alleged that Sojan had also "brutally tortured" another man and "murdered him". She also alleged that Sojan had made "derogative statements in the visual media against the petitioner and her two daughters and humiliated them". 

Findings

The High Court observed that was not the Investigating Officer in the crime registered of the Walayar Police Station. Instead, he was the Deputy Superintendent of Police and "no strictures were passed against him", the court added. 

The high court noted that the division bench (of the high court) in its 2021 order, division bench of the High Court while referring to M. J. Sojan had said, “Despite a reasonably good job done by the Dy.S.P., the investigating officer, who was deputed to investigate these cases almost a week after the younger girl's death, he could not gather any proper scientific evidence”. 

The court further noted that it had quashed the proceedings filed by the brother of the man (who the petitioner claimed Sojan had tortured) for want of sanction. 

"Even though permission was sought to prosecute the 5th respondent (Sojan), the same was declined and was confirmed by this Court in W.P.(C)No. 6502/2019. As matters stand now, the judgment has attained finality," the court said. 

The court further noted that it had in September quashed order of the Special Court, taking cognizance of the offence under the POSCO Act against Sojan for allegedly making derogative statements against the petitioner and her daughters on TV. 

"It is the 5th respondent's (Sojan) case that he has not made any derogative statements. He also disputed his voice and contended that there were no visuals, time, stamps, or descriptions of the location from where the statements were made. The 4th respondent(Home Secretary), after considering the rival pleading and submissions, by Ext.P4 order, has held that the reliability of the voice clip submitted by the petitioner is not proved, and there is no substantial evidence to revoke the Integrity Certificate," the court noted. 

The court thereafter referred to norms promulgated by the Ministry of Home Affairs which state that Integrity Certificate shall not be withheld merely because an inquiry is pending. It also referred to Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations which states that the name of an officer to be included in the list shall be treated as provisional, if the State Government withholds the Integrity Certificate, if any proceedings (departmental or criminal) are pending against the officer or if there is anything adverse to him which renders him unsuitable for the appointment to service. Explanation I of the Regulation states that the proceedings shall be treated as pending only if a charge sheet is issued to the officer or is filed in a court. 

"In the present case, in addition to the findings and the directions of the Division Bench in Ext.P2 judgment, which has attained finality, as of today, there is no charge sheet pending against the 5th respondent(Sojan). Moreover, the 4th respondent (Home Secretary) has doubted the reliability of the voice clip submitted by the petitioner and held that the petitioner had not submitted any substantial evidence to revoke the Integrity Certificate. It is based on the above findings that the 4th respondent, in its wisdom, has concluded that the 5th respondent is entitled to an Integrity Certificate," the court said. 

The Court thus dismissed the petition observing that it was devoid of any merits. 

Case Title: XXX v Union of India and Others

Counsel for the Petitioners: Advocates K. Ramkumar (Sr.) P. V. Jeevesh, C. K. Radhakrishnan (Chalil), C. R. Neelakandan

Counsel for the Respondents: Advocates George Poonthottam (Sr.), Thomas J. Anakkalunkal, Rajit, Arun Chandran, Anupama Anna Jose Kandath, Jayaraman S., Dhanya Sunny, Ann Milka George

Case No: WP(C) 31104 of 2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 824