P. GOPALAKRISHNAN @ DILEEP v. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ** **TUESDAY, THE 16[TH] DAY OF APRIL 2024/27TH CHAITHRA, 1946** **WA NO. 581 OF 2024** **AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.04.2024 IN IA.3/2024 IN WP(Crl.) NO.445 OF 2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA** ## **- APPELLANT/7TH RESPONDENT 7TH RESPONDENT:** **P. GOPALAKRISHNAN @ DILEEP, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. LATE PADMANABHAN PILLAI, PADMASAROVARAM HOUSE, KOTTARAKADAVU, ALUVA – 683101.** **BY ADVS. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE SRI.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM SMT.V.T.LITHA SMT.K.R.MONISHA SMT.NITYA R. SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI (SR.)** ## **- - RESPONDENTS/APPLICANT PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 6 RESPONDENTS 1 TO 6:** - **1 XXXX** **2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIATE, THIRVANANTHAPURAM-695001.** W.A. No.581/2024 : 2 : - **3 SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695501** - **4 DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KERALA, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695010.** - **5 ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE(CRIMES) POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695010, PIN – 695010** - **6 INVESTIGATING OFFICER, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CRIME BRANCH ALAPPUZHA – 688012.** - **7 STATE FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695001.** **BY ADVS. SMT.T.B.MINI SRI.GOWRAV AGARWAL SMT.AMMINIKUTTY, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.A. No.581/2024 : 3 : ## **N. NAGARESH & P.M. MANOJ, JJ.** ````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` ## W.A. No.581 of 2024 ````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` _Dated this the 16[th] day of April, 2024_ ## **J U D G M E N T** ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ## _**Nagaresh, J.**_ Additional 7[th] respondent in W.P.(Crl.) No.445/2022 has filed this writ appeal against the order dated 12.04.2024 in IA No.3/2024 in W.P.(Crl.) No.445/2022. 2. W.P.(Crl.) No.445/2022 was filed by the 1[st] respondent who is a film actress by profession and de facto complainant in Crime No.297/2017 of Nedumbassery Police Station in Ernakulam District and also in SC. No.118/2018 of the Additional Special Sessions Court (CBI/SPE-III), Ernakulam. The 1[st] respondent sought to direct W.A. No.581/2024 : 4 : respondents 4 and 5 to do a free, fair and complete further investigation in Crime No.297/2017 pending trial as SC No.118/2018 before the Additional Special Sessions Court inclusive of the illegal access, tampering and transmission of the contents of the memory card while it was in the safe custody of the trial court and also tampering made in the mobile phones surrendered by the 8[th] accused and to monitor the said investigation without any illegal interference by calling upon periodical reports regarding the progress of the investigation till further Final Report is submitted before the court below. 3. The said W.P.(Crl.) No.445/2022 was disposed of by this Court as per judgment dated 07.12.2023 with various directions to ensure authentic and impartial investigation. The 1[st] respondent thereafter filed IA No.3/2024 in the disposed writ petition seeking for direction to the District and Sessions Judge, Ernakulam to issue certified copies of the statements of the persons who were examined in the inquiry. W.A. No.581/2024 : 5 : 4. The appellant herein submits that such an interim application filed seeking new and further reliefs in a writ petition that had been disposed, could not even have been numbered by the Registry. The appellant states that on 12.04.2024, IA No.3/2024 was allowed and the Single Judge directed the Sessions Judge, Ernakulam to issue certified copies of the statements of persons examined during the inquiry to the 1[st] respondent. The objections raised by the appellant were held to be not tenable. The learned Single Judge held that the admission of interim application would not amount to revival of the proceedings and that the relief sought for in the IA is ancillary. 5. The appellant is aggrieved by the order allowing IA No.3/2024. The Senior Counsel representing the appellant submits that the passing of the interim directions in a disposed writ petition is impermissible and evidently a revival of the disposed proceedings. It is settled law that finally disposed proceedings cannot be reopened by filing interim application seeking fresh direction. The Hon’ble W.A. No.581/2024 : 6 : Apex Court in _**State of Uttar Pradesh v. Brahm Datt Sharma and another** [(1987) 2 SCC 179]_ has deprecated such practice in the strongest terms. 6. The Senior Counsel pointed out that the Hon’ble Apex Court in _**Hari Singh Mann v. Harbhajan Bajwa and others** [(2001) 1 SCC 169]_ has held that the practice of filing miscellaneous petitions after the disposal of the main case and issuance of fresh directions in such miscellaneous petitions by the High Court are unwarranted, not referable to any statutory provision and in substance, abuse of the process of the court. 7. In _**Nazma v. Javed alias Anjum** [(2013) 1 SCC 376]_ , the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that once the criminal writ petition has been disposed of, the High Court has become functus officio and cannot entertain review petitions or miscellaneous applications except for carrying out typographical or clerical errors. The Senior Counsel urged that the reliefs sought in the interim application is not ancillary and it would amount to revival of the proceedings. W.A. No.581/2024 : 7 : 8. The counsel for the 1[st] respondent (writ petitioner) urged that Writ Appeal No.581/2024 has been filed without any _bona fide_ . The learned Single Judge has ordered in IA No.3/2024 only to provide certified copies of the statements of persons examined during the inquiry to the petitioner. The order dated 12.04.2024 in IA No.3/2024 does not amount to reopening of the proceedings. It does not in any manner revive the proceedings. The writ appeal is therefore liable to be dismissed. 9. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the 1[st] respondent and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 2 to 7. 10. W.P.(Crl.) No.445/2022 was filed by the 1[st] respondent herein seeking for various directions to ensure a free and fair investigation in respect of a case in which the 1[st] respondent is the de facto complainant and victim in the crime. The said W.P.(Crl.) was considered by the learned Single Judge and disposed of giving elaborate directions so W.A. No.581/2024 : 8 : as to ensure unbiased investigation/trial and privacy of the victim. 11. In order to effectively aid prosecution of the case, the 1[st] respondent filed IA No.3/2024 in the W.P.(Crl.) seeking to direct the District and Sessions Judge, Ernakulam to issue certified copies of the statements of persons who were examined in the inquiry and whose statements were recorded in the inquiry, to the 1[st] respondent for verifying the same, in the light of the statements and findings in the inquiry reports. As per judgment dated 07.12.2023, the learned Single Judge had directed the District and Sessions Judge, Ernakulam to conduct a fact finding inquiry on the allegations of unauthorised access to the memory card and copying and transmitting its contents. 12. The learned Single Judge found that the admission of IA No.3/2024 would not amount to revival of the proceedings. The relief sought for is ancillary in nature. The 1[st] respondent has a right to know the statements given W.A. No.581/2024 : 9 : by various persons in the course of inquiry. The Sessions Judge therefore directed to issue certified copies of the statements of persons examined during the inquiry to the appellant. 13. The learned Single Judge has held that the memory card which is a material in the crime, was connected to computer systems installed with devices capable of copying or transferring the electronic record or mutating the contents. The victim's interest has not been protected and it has resulted in violation of victim's fundamental constitutional rights. The emotional and psychological harm being suffered by the victim is beyond imagination. The learned Single Judge therefore directed the District and Sessions Judge, Ernakulam to conduct a fact finding inquiry on the allegations of unauthorised access to the memory card and copying and transmitting its contents. The 1[st] respondent was granted liberty to present written submissions before the District and Sessions Judge. W.A. No.581/2024 : 10 : 14. It is to effectively prosecute the case that the 1[st] respondent has sought for certified copies of the statements of persons examined during the inquiry. In the facts of the case, we are of the firm view that the conclusion arrived at by the learned Single Judge that issuance of certified copies of the statements would not amount to revival of the proceedings and that relief granted in IA No.3/2024 is ancillary, is legally correct and sustainable. We do not find any merit in the writ appeal warranting interference in the order in IA No.3/2024. The writ appeal is therefore dismissed. Sd/- **N. NAGARESH, JUDGE** Sd/- **P.M. MANOJ, JUDGE** aks/16.04.2024 W.A. No.581/2024 : 11 : ## **APPENDIX OF WA 581/2024** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** |**Annexure A1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT**| |---|---| ||**PUBLISHED IN MALAYALAMANORAMA DAILY**| ||**AS THEIR LEAD NEWS ON THE FRONT PAGE**| ||**ON 11.04.2024.**| |**Annexure A2**|**TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT**| ||**PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMI DAILY ON**| ||**11.04.2024**| |**Annexure A3**|**TRUE COPIES OF THE SCREEN SHOTS OF**| ||**THE HEAD LINES OF THE NEWS REPORTS**| ||**ABOUT THE ALLEGATIONS RAISED BY THE**| ||**WRIT PETITIONER TELECAST BY REPORTER**| ||**TV ON 10.04.2024.**| |**Annexure A4**|**TRUE COPIES OF THE SCREEN SHOTS OF**| ||**THE HEAD LINES OF THE NEWS REPORTS**| ||**TELECAST**<br>**BY**<br>**REPORTER**<br>**TV**<br>**ON**| ||**12.04.2024.**| |**Annexure A5**|**TRUE COPIES OF THE SCREEN SHOTS OF**| ||**THE HEADLINES OF THE NEWS REPORTS**| ||**TELECAST BY THE REPORTER TV ON**| ||**12.04.2024.**| |**Annexure A6**|**TRUE COPIES OF THE SCREEN SHOTS OF**| ||**THE HEAD LINES OF THE NEWS REPORTS**| ||**TELECAST BY THE REPORTER TV ON**| ||**13.04.2024**| |**Annexure A7**|**TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT**| ||**PUBLISHED IN DIGITAL MALAYALI ON**| ||**11.04.2024.**| |**Annexure A8**|**TRUE COPIES OF THE SCREEN SHOTS OF**| ||**THE HEAD LINES OF THE NEWS REPORTS**| ||**TELECAST**<br>**BY**<br>**REPORTER**<br>**TV**<br>**ON**| ||**11.04.2024.**|