Kerala High Court Dismisses Appeal By ADM Naveen Babu's Wife Seeking CBI Probe Into His Death

The Division Bench of Justice P.B.Suresh Kumar and Justice Jobin Sebastian dismissed the writ appeal stating that there is no legitimate apprehension that the present investigation conducted by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) is partial or improper. 

The Court relying upon the Apex Court decision in Suneetha Narreddy v. CBI (2023) stated that investigations cannot be transferred to CBI based on the personal feelings of the victim and that there must be reasonable apprehension based on concrete facts. Court stated that investigation could be transferred to CBI only when the apprehension is reasonable, and not imaginary. 

Court said, "The personal feelings of the victim, howsoever genuine, is not enough to warrant a transfer. If the principle aforesaid is not adopted while considering the requests for transferring investigation, the public would think that the system can be easily swayed by outside influence and consequently, lose faith in the normal legal process. They would also start thinking that investigations could be manipulated or that the system is not that reliable. That apart, if transfers of investigations are too frequent, this can also lead to a loss of trust in the criminal justice system, both from the public point of view and also from the point of view of those who rely on the integrity of the legal process. No doubt, in the pursuit of truth, the doubts and apprehensions that occur should not be dismissed, neither should the same be allowed to paralyse us."

The Court concluded that this was not a case warranting CBI probe and that any agency could conduct the investigation, adhering to established investigative protocols.

Court said, “This is not a case where the accusation is against top officials of the State Government or State Police who would be in a position to influence the investigation, when the investigation is conducted by their subordinate officers. This is also not a case where the CBI, or for that matter any other investigating agency, would be in an advantageous position to carry on the investigation in a fair and impartial manner. This is also not a case where the death of Naveen Babu has political repercussions for the political leaders to go overboard and interfere with the investigation to protect the image of the political party."

Background

Initially, Naveen Babu's wife moved a writ petition seeking CBI probe which was dismissed by the High Court on February 06. The single judge had observed that the accused merely having ties with the ruling political dispensation was not ground to transfer investigation to the CBI. The Court had also stated that the appellant could not point to any material flaw in the current investigation, warranting a CBI probe.

Thereafter, Manjusha moved writ appeal before the High Court stating that the CBI probe was refused without considering the flaws and discrepancies in the present investigation by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) . It was argued that the investigation lacks credibility and alleged that the accused would influence witnesses and destroy evidence due to having ties with the ruling political party. It was also contended that the Court ought to have considered this as a rare and exceptional case for ordering CBI probe.

The High Court reheard the writ appeal, which had been reserved for orders, after Naveen Babu's family expressed dissatisfaction with the request for a Crime Branch investigation instead of a CBI investigation. It was argued that the Court must consider the apprehensions expressed by the family of deceased Naveen Babu about the present investigation and hand over the probe to CBI. 

Case Title: Manjusha K v CBI

Case No: WA 193/2025

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 149

Click here to read/download Order