[Missing CPM Worker] 'Investigation Is Progressing' : Kerala High Court Closes Wife's Habeas Corpus Plea

Update: 2022-01-25 05:16 GMT
story

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday disposed of the habeas corpus plea moved by a CPM worker's wife alleging that her missing husband was abducted for reasons associated with the upcoming CPM branch election, recording that the investigation was progressing in the matter. A Division Bench comprising Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran closed the writ petition after the...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday disposed of the habeas corpus plea moved by a CPM worker's wife alleging that her missing husband was abducted for reasons associated with the upcoming CPM branch election, recording that the investigation was progressing in the matter. 

A Division Bench comprising Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran closed the writ petition after the respondents submitted a report indicating that they are carrying on with the investigation and that a man missing case was registered in the matter. 

"A report has been filed stating that they are carrying on with the investigation. So we are inclined to close the petition. They are taking all efforts." 

In the previous hearing of the case, the Court had sought a statement from the respondents on the stage of the investigation. 

Advocates Sonu Augustine and V. Praveen appeared for the petitioner.

In her plea, the petitioner had alleged that she was prompted to approach the Court owing to no progress being made in the investigation despite the passage of one month since her husband went missing.

The petitioner's husband, Sajeevan Poriyanteparambil, a CPM party member and a fisherman, went missing on 29th September. He left home in the early hours that day for fishing but did not return.

Concerned about his absence, the matter was reported to the Ambalappuzha police station that very evening.

The petitioner alleged that she has a reasonable apprehension that it is not a case of man-missing but of abduction in connection with a dissident movement within the party.

Upon noticing no progress being made at the investigation, the petitioner approached the District Superintendent of Police on 6th October seeking immediate action. Although the same was promised to her, she submitted that there no information regarding her husband was found.

Accordingly, she had approached the Court stating that it is the statutory duty of the Station House Officer and the Superintendent of Police to enquire into the whereabouts of her husband and it was illegal of them to adopt a lethargic attitude in the matter.

Case Title: Sajitha Sajeevan v. Station House Officer & Ors.

Tags:    

Similar News