Fake Antique Dealer Case: Kerala High Court Slams Police Chief For Levelling Baseless Accusations Against Court

Interesting developments took place in the infamous fake antique dealer Monson Mavunkal's case, wherein the Kerala High Court on Thursday came down heavily on the State Police Chief for filing an application containing veiled accusations and threats against the Court.

Justice Devan Ramachandran was evidently chagrined at the application submitted by the Director-General of Prosecution T.A Shaji on behalf of the State Police Chief seeking that the writ petition be closed.

The Court observed that a police officer dictating how to manage a case was highly unsuitable and unheard of:

"No one, much less the parties to a lis, can dictate to this Court how and in what manner it is to be decided. They can make their case through pleadings and submissions, but can never insist that this Court deliver judgment in the manner they require. This application is unusual, never seen before in other cases, but surely filed with a design in seeking that this court dispose of the afore writ petition, in the manner as sought for therein, even before it has been finally heard or pleadings of the parties completed."

The Single Judge also opined that this was aggravated by the fact that the tenor of the allegations contained in the applications was seemingly arrogant: 

"The overbearing and recriminatory tenor of the averments in the affidavit, sworn to by a very senior ranking officer, in support of this application, is conspicuous and it reads like an argument note, to insist that this Court deliver judgment in a certain way."

In the application filed yesterday, several allegations were made against the Court, which the Judge viewed as offensive.

The application had mentioned that matters beyond the pleadings of the petitioner were taken up and discussed and that this was likely to adversely affect the ongoing investigation. 

To this, the judge responded that the DGP could not accuse him of having taken him by surprise, because everything that was found in the public domain was confirmed by the affidavits produced before the Court. 

"You are saying I forced you to produce documents and breached confidentiality. How dare you? You volunteered to produce them when I specifically asked if you had an objection to the same. The kind of sarcasm shown against the court, I'm truly surprised," the Judge remarked orally.

The Court added that if a police officer felt powerful enough to accuse the Court and its lawyers, then it is a dark time for our system.

"These averments are not merely incorrect, but unfortunate because, the various orders, in this case, would luculently show that this Court was only acting strictly edifice on the averments, materials and documents placed on record by the official respondents themselves and no other; and that no critical information - which was even whisperingly stated by the learned Director General of Prosecution to be confidential - was discussed or considered by this Court."

Further, during the course of hearing, the DGP was incapable of pinpointing a single occurrence when the Court had crossed the line during the proceedings of this case.

Enraged by the empty accusations levelled agents the Court, the Judge declared that an application of this nature should never have been attempted. 

As such, the application was dismissed.

Meanwhile, the Court reprimanded that DGP after noting that accusations were not only levelled against the Court but also another officer of the court, accusing him of being over-enthusiastic. 

"You should not have allowed an IPS officer to say such things about an officer of this court. How dare he deride the Court in this manner? You think if you don the khaki uniform you can say anything about the Court. These are veiled threats, an attempt to brow-beat this court. And now you are asking me to keep my eyes, ears and mouth shut."

The Court dismissed the application but refrained from imposing costs.

It is to be noted that another petitioner has approached the Court seeking police protection from Mavunkal. This plea was preferred by a doctor and several allegations are made against two high-ranking police officers. The Court granted the petitioner police protection and will hear the matter further on December 17.

Case Title: Ajith EV v. Commissioner of Police and Ors.

Click Here To Read/Download The Order