'There Cannot Be A Cover-Up' : Kerala High Court Allows Petitioner To Implead ED In Fake Antique Dealer Case

The Kerala High Court on Thursday allowed the petitioner, the former driver of controversial fake antique dealer Monson Mavunkal, to implead the Enforcement Directorate into the case.

Justice Devan Ramachandran remarked:

"I am only concerned about the investigation being proper. There cannot be a cover-up. So the investigation has to be conducted on several angles of the case with the assistance of different agencies."

Director-General of Prosecution TA Shaji appearing for the respondents in the matter had submitted a report in a sealed cover evidencing details of the ongoing investigation in the case for the perusal of the Court. 

He added that the investigation was ongoing by a Special Investigating Team constituted for the same. The Bench after going through the same posed a few suspicions in the matter.

• Influenced investigation

It was informed that the two officers had been to Mavunkal's residence to witness his antiquities collection. The Court wondered why neither of them raised a doubt regarding his license to possess such antiquities as mandated under the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act.

Subsequently, one of the officers was unconvinced with the genuineness of these articles and had ordered an enquiry into it. The intelligence report for this enquiry was made available after a prolonged delay of seven months. The Bench asked why there was such an inherent delay in the same.

Moreover, despite the intelligence report disclosing serious inputs about the dealer, he walked free and went on to commit graver crimes. The Court opined that if he had been nipped at the bud, a lot of this could have been avoided. 

"It is virtually clear without contest that he was allowed to walk free. Now there are rape and POCSO cases against him. A proper policing could have averted these, that's all I am saying."

Further, it was brought to the attention of the Court that there were no police officers in the array of accused in the case. Yet, the DGP informed the Court that one of the police officers was suspended from service. This prompted the Court to speculate on the possibilities of the investigation being influenced since if there were evidence against that officer incriminating enough to suspend him, he should have been added as an accused. 

• Expatriate Links 

The report also suggested that Mavunkal was either abroad or in Delhi most of the time. The Court noted that if this had been an ordinary man, 'he would have been jailed a long time ago'.

It was also on record that the two officers had visited his house upon being invited by one Anitha Pullayil. She claims to be the Global Coordinator of a Pravasi Malayali Federation, an expat organisation. 

In this regard, the Court asked the investigating agencies to see if the federation or any agencies outside the State were involved in the case in any manner, or if the said woman has any role in the matter.

"A sum total of what I have peripherally observed above is prima facie that there is much more than what meets the eye." 

Advocate Thomas T Varghese appearing for the petitioner submitted that he required more time to submit a reply in the matter. 

The observations came in a petition filed by the dealer's former driver, who had alleged harassment from his ex-employer and certain police officers close to him.

The matter will be taken up again on 19.11.2021.

Also Read: Why Was The Fake Antique Dealer Granted Protection? Kerala High Court Demands An Answer From Police

Case Title: Ajith E.V. v. The Commissioner of Police & Ors.