[Recruiting Indian Citizens In Russian Army] Mother Of Commission Agent Approaches Kerala High Court Seeking Protection From CBI Probe

Justice Devan Ramachandran stated that the petitioner can be summoned for investigation only by issuing a notice. The Court further stated that if later she the petitioner is being arrayed as an accused, the authorities can proceed investigation as per law.

The petitioner's son who worked as a temporary commission agent in a travelling company is arrayed as the 17^th accused in a crime lodged by the CBI under Section 120 B (punishment for criminal conspiracy) and 370 (trafficking of persons) of the Indian Penal Code.

The specific allegation is that the petitioner's son along with the other accused was involved in the trafficking of Indian citizens to Russia on the pretext of getting better and high-paying jobs in the Russian Army. It is alleged that traffickers seize the passports of Indian nationals on reaching Russia and they are given training in combat roles and provided with the uniform of the Russian army. It is further alleged that the traffickers deploy Indian nationals at war front bases in the Russia-Ukraine war zone.

Media has reported that two Indian nationals recruited by the Russian army were killed in an ongoing war between Ukraine and Russia. It is also reported that the Indian government is in talks with Russia about the return of Indian citizens who were trafficked to Russia duping better jobs and high pay.

Advocate Naveen Radhakrishnan, Counsel for the petitioner stated her son was innocent and that she has no knowledge about his whereabouts. It is alleged that CBI officials threatened her by saying that she would be taken into custody for investigation. The petitioner stated that the officials are duty-bound to disclose their identity and proceed as per law by following the guidelines provided by the Apex Court in D K Basu v State of West Bengal. She submitted that officials must act with transparency and in good faith. The petitioner submitted

Special Prosecutor For CBI, Dr KP Satheesan assisted by Advocate Gokul D Sudhakaran submitted that even though the petitioner is not arrayed as accused now, a large amount of money was recovered from her warranting an investigation. The Counsel assured the Court that the petitioner would be summoned only after issuance of notice for questioning since she is not arrayed as an accused now. 

Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of. 

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 348

Case Title: xxx v Superintendent of Police, CBI

Case Number: WPC 19526/2024