Kerala High Court Says Chief Judicial Magistrate May Have Forged Evidence In Trial, Orders Lakshadweep Administrator To Suspend Him Pending Enquiry

The Kerala High Court on Friday said that former Chief Judicial Magistrate at Amini island in Lakshadweep seems to have forged evidence in a criminal trial and is liable to be proceeded against under law.Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan directed Lakshadweep Administrator to place K. Cheriyakoya, who is currently working as Secretary of the District Legal Services Authority, under suspension forthwith and conduct a detailed enquiry into his actions."Even if a person is occupying the post of Magistrate or Judge, the law of the land is applicable to all. If there is any dereliction of duty, the constitutional courts should step in to strengthen the trust of the people in the judiciary. The Magistrate, Judges and other presiding officers are not above the law and if they commit any dereliction of duty, they have to face the consequences. This should be a lesson to all," said the courtThe court said it is of "prima facie opinion" that the judicial officer forged the evidence of the investigating officer during the trial. It also said that prima facie, the officer committed serious misconduct and dereliction of duty."The disciplinary authority of the additional 3rd respondent is the Administrator, Union Territory of Lakshadweep. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the opinion that the disciplinary authority should place the additional 3rd respondent under suspension pending enquiry. It is true that whether a person is to be placed under suspension pending enquiry is to be decided by the Disciplinary Authority. But in extra ordinary situations, extra ordinary orders are necessary to protect the interest of justice. I am of the opinion that this is a fit case in which this Court has to direct the Administrator Union Territory of Lakshadweep, to place the 3rd respondent under suspension pending enquiry".The court further issued notice under Section 340 CrPC to Cheriyakoya, Bench Clerk P.P. Muthukoya and Bench Assistant A.C. Puthunni for conducting a preliminary enquiry in to the offences referred in Clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Sec. 195 Cr.P.C."The Registry will give a separate number to the Sec.340 Cr.P.C. proceedings in accordance with law and post the case on 23.1.2023 for the appearance of the additional 3rd respondent and other persons mentioned above," ordered the court.FactsA case was registered at Agatti Police Station in 2015 after a "mob of around 40 persons" allegedly formed an unlawful assembly with an intention of rioting and obstructed the Amin, Surveyor, contractor and the coconut climbers. The case was registered under Sections 143, 147, 188, 186 and 353 r/w Section 149 IPC against the accused persons. The Magistrate took cognizance of the offence, and the accused were enlarged on bail. The trial in the case also commenced, and the prosecution witnesses 1 to 5 were examined on March 7, 2019.On October 19, 2022, even though the witnesses were not present, the Magistrate issued warrant to the petitioners. They thus appeared on November 3, 2022, to recall the warrant. On that day, the Magistrate is stated to have said warrant was already recalled and they could go home. According to the petitioners-accused, when the counsel submitted to the Magistrate to issue summons to PW7 who is the Investigating officer for cross examining him, the judge informed that he had already been examined on March 24, 2021 at Kadamath Island Camp Sitting. The petitioners however submitted that on perusal of the 'A Diary', no such proceedings regarding the examination of PW7 was noted on the said date, nor was there any signature of the witness in the deposition. The petitioners therefore specifically contended that the Magistrate had forged the evidence in order to convict the petitioners. According to the petitioners, the magistrate has personal enmity towards them in this case because some of the accused are the plaintiffs in a civil suit, and they had filed a complaint against the alleged prejudiced view of the judicial officer before the Registrar (Subordinate Judiciary) of the High Court of Kerala, which is pending enquiry. During the trial, the petitioners had subsequently, submitted a written statement before the magistrate narrating the grievance, followed by an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to re-examine PW7. They also had filed another application for examination of 7 defence witnesses. The applications were not considered, the high court was told.The Magistrate instead convicted the accused and imposed a sentence of imprisonment for a period of 4 ½ years under different Sections of IPC, and directed the accused persons to undergo the sentence separately, without considering these applications, on November 15, 2022. High Court CaseThe petitioners then filed a petition before the high court accusing the judicial officer of committing forgery. The investigating officer appeared before the high court and categorically said that he had not given any evidence before the magistrate in the...

Kerala High Court Says Chief Judicial Magistrate May Have Forged Evidence In Trial, Orders Lakshadweep Administrator To Suspend Him Pending Enquiry

Navya Benny

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Kerala High Court Says Chief Judicial Magistrate May Have Forged Evidence In Trial, Orders Lakshadweep Administrator To Suspend Him Pending Enquiry

Navya Benny

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers