Justice Jobin Sebastian rejects petitioners’ claims of procedural lapse under the BNSS, emphasizing that police non-compliance with judicial directives risks creating institutional anarchy.
High Court Rejects Police Officers’ Quashing Petition
The Ponnani rape case Kerala High Court proceedings took a significant turn on Friday after the High Court upheld a magistrate’s order directing the registration of an FIR against three senior police officers. Justice Jobin Sebastian dismissed the criminal miscellaneous petition filed in Vinod Valiyattoor & Ors v. State of Kerala & Anr. He found no procedural error in the magistrate’s decision and refused to interfere with the order.
Court Warns Against Disobedience of Judicial Orders
The High Court strongly criticized the police for not registering the FIR despite clear judicial directions. Justice Sebastian said courts may review the legality of a magistrate’s order through proper legal procedures. However, police officers cannot ignore or delay its implementation. He added that a Station House Officer (SHO) cannot avoid a judicial direction by claiming to act under superior officers. According to the Court, such conduct would undermine the rule of law and create institutional anarchy.
Petitioners Challenge Magistrate’s Order
The petitioners included Superintendent of Police Sujith Das, Deputy Superintendent of Police V.V. Benny, and Circle Inspector Vinod Valiyattoor. They asked the High Court to quash the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s order at Ponnani. The order directed the SHO to register an FIR and investigate a private complaint alleging rape and sexual assault. The officers argued that the allegations were false, malicious, and intended to retaliate against actions they took while performing official duties.
Officers Cite BNSS Safeguards
The petitioners also argued that the magistrate failed to follow the safeguards available to public servants under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). They claimed the court did not properly apply Sections 175(3) and 175(4), which protect public officials from vexatious prosecutions. In addition, they stated that departmental inquiries conducted since 2022 had already cleared them of wrongdoing. They also relied on earlier Supreme Court rulings that stressed strict compliance with Section 175 BNSS before ordering criminal investigations.
Legal Representation
The Ponnani rape case Kerala High Court matter saw Senior Advocate S. Sreekumar appear for the petitioner police officers. He was assisted by advocates S. Rajeev, M.S. Aneer, Sarath K.P., Anilkumar C.R., K.S. Kiran Krishnan, T.P. Aravind, Akash Cherian Thomas, Azad Sunil, Maheswar Padickal, Akshara S., Nivedita Rajeev, and Dipa V. Director General of Prosecution T. Asaf Ali represented the State of Kerala. Advocates Gentle C.D., M. Shameem Ahamed, and Muhammed Firdouz A.V. appeared for the de facto complainant.
