Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With Kerala HC Judgment Rejecting CBI Investigation Into Congress Worker Shuhaib's Murder

Update: 2024-09-24 07:40 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a plea seeking an investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the murder of a Youth Congress worker named Shuhaib in Kerala in February 2018.

The Court refused to interfere with the judgment of the division bench of the Kerala High Court which set aside the single bench direction for a CBI investigation into Shuhaib's murder.

A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan dismissed the petition filed by CP Mohammed and SP Raziya, the parents of Shuhaib, against the Kerala High Court's judgment. The bench however clarified that if the role of any other accused comes to light during the trial, the parties will be at liberty to take steps in accordance with the law. The bench observed that the State police has already filed chargesheet, arraying several persons as the accused, and it would be imprudent to interfere with the matter at this juncture.

Nearly a month after the crime, in March 2018, a single bench of the High Court ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the matter, which is allegedly a political murder committed at the instance of members linked to the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the ruling party in the State of Kerala. However, in August 2019, a division bench set aside the single bench's direction, observing that there was no material to assume that the State police investigation was biased.

Senior Advocate V Giri, appearing for the appellants before the Supreme Court, responding to a query by the bench, informed that the final report has been filed. Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, appearing for the State, stated that though chargesheet has been filed, trial has not proceeded because of the pendency of the present matter in the Supreme Court.

"2018 the incident has happened. If we restore the order of single bench, what will happen now after so many years? It is not as if...there are many accused who are found to be involved...some of them are political functionaries... 160 CDRs are investigated...," Justice Gavai observed.

"The apprehension is that, those who are at the helm of the political party won't be tried. This has political overtones. This is not the first incident in that part of the State. This used to happen with regularity at one point of time, now a days there is some abatement. When the parents say that there are circumstances to indicate that this has happened at the behest of the top functionaries of the party, the State investigating agency would be reluctant to get into that question," Giri said.

"Any interference at this stage would be detrimental to the case. The investigation is complete. So many accused are there. It is not as if they have given clean chit. So many accused are political functionaries also," Justice Gavai said.

"Those who are responsible have not been made accused, and those who are not responsible have been made accused. So where will the trial lead to?The apprehension of the parents is genuine. There was a political procession that Shuhaib would be done away with. The persons who are actually responsible, according to the parents, have not been implicated...We are not fighting any political battle," Giri submitted.   

Justice Viswanathan said that if during the trial, the parents depose regarding the involvement of other accused, then steps under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be taken to summon them.

"Once they get into the box and talk about the involvement of the other accused, 319 can be invoked against other accused", Justice Viswanathan said.  Giri requested that the said right be preserved.

The bench then dictated the order as follows :

"We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. In any case, if during the trial, the role of any other accused comes to light, the parties are always at liberty to take such steps as permissible under law."

Case : C.P. MOHAMMED Vs THE STATE OF KERALA | SLP(Crl) No. 10308/2019

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Full View
Tags:    

Similar News