[LIFE Mission Case] Kerala High Court DB Dismisses PIL Seeking Interference In Proceedings Before Single Bench

The Kerala High Court on Friday dismissed as non-maintainable, a PIL filed by journalist Michael Varghese, seeking to quash the proceedings before a Single Bench of the High Court under Section 482 of CrPC, for quashing of complaint registered in connection with the FCRA irregularities in the 'LIFE Mission' project of the State Government. Varghese had sought registration of FIR against the Pinarayi Vijayan, the Chief Minister of Kerala and M. Shivashankaran, Former Principal Secretary to the CM, for various offences allegedly committed by them in the scams, like Sprinklr deal, Gold smuggling, red crescent-Life Mission etc. Declining this plea, the Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly observed, "Fundamentally speaking, there is no such procedure of interference by a writ court in a Public Interest Litigation seeking intervention in a pending proceedings before the learned single Judge. The Code of Criminal Procedure as well as the Kerala High Court Act, and the Rules of the High Court enables a writ court to function only in accordance with the powers conferred thereunder and the constitution and the laws and not abrogative to law. This is more so when an aggrieved person is left with a right and liberty to take up the matter before any appellate legal forum and so is the case of the writ petitioner." It added, "it is made clear that the power of a learned single Judge is regulated by Section 3 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, wherein as per subSection (3), the single Judge is vested with power to exercise original jurisdiction under any law for the time being in force, apart from exercise of other powers under the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Code of Civil Procedure. So also, as per clause 10 (iii) of Section 3 a single Judge is vested with powers to consider petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India except where such power relates to the issue of a writ of the nature of the Habeas Corpus. We are also of the view when powers to be exercised by the Judges are clearly delineated in the Kerala High Court Act, 1958 interference with such powers of a learned single Judge is basically deprecated and therefore, a writ petition filed with the intention of such interference collatorily cannot be sustained under law" Background The Chief Executive Officer of 'LIFE Mission' project under the Kerala Government had approached the HC in Crl. MC No. 4375/2020, seeking to quash the FIR registered over alleged violations of FCRA in relation to accepting foreign donations from UAE. Considering the petition for admission, a single bench of Justice V G Arun said that the Court cannot interfere with the investigation at this stage and that it needs to wait for more details to emerge. The bench orally remarked "let the investigation go on". The bench added that the CEO has not been named as an accused and that he has only been summoned to produce certain documents and that he should cooperate with the probe. The Petitioner herein, who is also an intervening part in the said proceedings before the Single Judge, sought quashing of those proceedings, in public interest. The thrust of his contention was that a Government Pleader had been "subterfuged" to quash the complaint as against the Chairman of the Life Mission namely, the Chief Minister and the other Government officials. This was contended to be an abuse of process of court and illegal and unconstitutional. The case projected by the Petitioner was that the Life Mission project is headed by the Chief Minister of Kerala as the Chairman and therefore, engagement of the Senior Government Pleader to file the Crl.M.C before a learned single Judge is unconstitutional and illegal, since the State Government is duty bound to protect the interest of the State in regard to the corruption, and the allegation of misuse of funds made against the said organization. The Petitioner submitted, "The Chief Minister and other officials against whom complaint dated 20.09.2020 was made are entitled to seek quashing of the same and they are entitled to succeed also, if they could convince the learned single Judge. However, the attempt was made by the Chief Minister to quash the complaint by filing the Crl. M.C through the Chief Executive Officer of the Life Mission, which is a gross abuse of law." State's Response The State Government had submitted that the Petitioner himself is an intervening party in the proceedings before the Single Judge and any collateral challenge against the institution of Crl. MC is not maintainable in a writ petition. It was submitted that the Petitioner, in effect, was seeking injunction against a third party from taking recourse to law, which is not maintainable by virtue of Section 41(b) and (d) of the Specific Relief Act. Findings The High Court observed that the Petitioner had failed to point out any law...

[LIFE Mission Case] Kerala High Court DB Dismisses PIL Seeking Interference In Proceedings Before Single Bench

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags