'A Case Of Abduction': Missing CPM Worker's Wife Moves Kerala High Court With Habeas Corpus Plea

Update: 2021-10-29 08:47 GMT
story

A CPM worker's wife has moved the Kerala High Court with a habeas corpus plea alleging that her missing husband was abducted for reasons associated with the upcoming CPM branch election. The petitioner was prompted to approach the Court owing to no progress being made at the investigation despite the passage of one month since her husband went missing. On Friday, a division bench...

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.

A CPM worker's wife has moved the Kerala High Court with a habeas corpus plea alleging that her missing husband was abducted for reasons associated with the upcoming CPM branch election.

The petitioner was prompted to approach the Court owing to no progress being made at the investigation despite the passage of one month since her husband went missing. 

On Friday, a division bench comprising Justices K. Vinod Chandran and C. Jayachandran issued notice to the State in the matter. 

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. 

The plea discloses that in the petitioner's locality, there are two factions of the party for long, often referred to as the 'official faction' and 'rebels' respectively. The rebels are reportedly quite strong in the area.

The lowest unit of the party is a branch committee. The petitioner's husband belonged to one of such branch committees and a meeting of the said branch was scheduled to be conducted on 30th September. This meeting was postponed indefinitely owing to Sajeevan's absence.  

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 submits that there is still no information regarding her husband. 

Accordingly, the petitioner has urged that since it is the statutory duty of the Station House Officer and the Superintendent of Police to enquire into the whereabouts of her husband, it was illegal of them to adopt a lethargic attitude in the matter. 

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

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

Tags:    

Similar News