[Actor Assault Case] Kerala High Court Dismisses Witness' Plea Alleging Harassment From Investigating Officer

While observing that the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted, Justice Anu Sivaraman clarified that the petitioner shall be summoned only after giving due notice under Section 160 CrPC and that he will not be harassed further or summoned unnecessarily, except for the purpose of recording the statement.

"The specific provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure, including Sections 160 and 161 as well as Section 35 of the Police Act, 2011 with regard to the examination of the witnesses by the police shall be strictly complied with and the Investigating Officer shall not compel or induce the petitioner to make any confessions or admissions."

When the plea was taken up earlier, the Judge had directed the Government Pleader to get instructions on the matter while posting it next week for consideration.

Notably, the respondent herein is the investigating officer in the 2017 sexual assault case and is also the alleged target of a murder conspiracy purportedly hatched by actor Dileep. 

As per the plea, the respondent-officer demanded the petitioner to give a statement as tutored by him under Section 164 of CrPC. However, the petitioner gave an honest statement before the Magistrate. It was alleged that the respondent also urged the petitioner to give evidence as instructed by him, but that the petitioner paid no heed to him.

Following this, the petitioner contended that the officer has been threatening him with dire consequences unless he disowns his earlier statements.

It is the case of the petitioner that since he did not succumbs to these 'illegal demands', the respondent officer has been harassing him to the maximum extent to make sure that he gives statements as required by the officer. It was further alleged that the officer has been harassing him for over four years already, 'making his life wretched and miserable'.

The petitioner had submitted that the conduct of the officer and his associates is highly unjust, illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Moreover, the plea stated that the officer has been frequently issuing notice to the petitioner summoning him to appear before him under section 161 of CrPC.

Apprehending physical and mental torture at the hands of the respondent officer, the petitioner moved the Court. Advocates R. Bindu Sasthamangalam, G. Rajagopal and Thejus Purushothaman appeared for the petitioner.

However, the specific case of the Investigating Officer is that a further investigation has been ordered in the crime under section 173(8) of the CrPC and the petitioner has been summoned only to give evidence in the further investigation.

The petitioner was earlier an employee of a business concern that belonged to the brother of actress Kavya Madhavan. (Kavya Madhavan is actor Dileep's wife). However, he resigned from this job in July 2017 over salary enhancement issues and has been making a living as an autorickshaw driver ever since.

In 2017, a prominent actor was raped in a moving vehicle and the incident was recorded on a mobile phone. This assault was purportedly a part of the conspiracy hatched by Dileep. Dileep is currently facing trial as the 8th accused in this case before the Special Sessions Court.

Case Title: Sagar Vincent v. Biju Paulose & Ors.