When people fear the state, there is tyranny: Karnataka HC
Bengaluru (PTI): When people begin to fear the State or its agents, there is tyranny, the High Court of Karnataka has observed.
"When the State or its agents fear the people there is liberty; when the people fear the State or its agents, there is tyranny," Justice M Nagaprasanna has said in his judgment on a petition filed by a 23-year-old advocate from Dakshina Kannada district who was manhandled by the police.
He was also paid a compensation of Rs 3 lakh which will be recovered from the erring police officers.
Kuldeep, the advocate from Puthila village in Belthangady had approached the HC after his complaint against Suthesh K P, a sub-inspector of police, was not registered. Even after the direction by the court, there was delay in registering the FIR.
The HC in its judgment recently, ordered the Director General and Inspector General of Police to initiate departmental inquiry against Suthesh "and his cohorts or any other officer, after identifying those officers who have indulged in the act of illegal arrest and alleged assault on the petitioner."
The inquiry should be concluded within three months, the HC has directed.
The HC also ordered payment of Rs 3 lakh compensation to Kuldeep which shall be recovered "from the salary of the officers found guilty in the departmental inquiry."
Kuldeep had obtained a restraining order against his neighbours K Vasantha Gowda and his wife Bhavani from erecting a gate that would have prevented him from accessing his agricultural land. The police took no action on the court's interim order and closed the complaint filed by Kuldeep.
The same day; December 2, 2022, Bhavani filed a complaint against Kuldeep for criminal trespass and theft alleging he had stolen the gate.
The complaint was filed at 8.15 PM. But the police arrived at Kuldeep's house at 8 PM and dragged him to the station without even allowing him to wear a shirt. His mother was also pushed aside. He was produced before the Magistrate the next day and was granted bail. He informed the Magistrate about the ill-treatment and being beaten up by the police and tortured.
The Magistrate recorded in the bail order to "Issue intimation to his higher authority to take necessary action against the police officer for violation of the personal liberty of the accused." Kuldeep spent the next two days in hospital.
Kuldeep filed a complaint against sub-inspector Sutheseh K P, but it was not registered. He approached the HC which sought a status report. It was only on January 5, 2023 that the FIR was registered.
In its judgment, the HC said that the Superintendent of Police, Mangaluru would supervise the investigation against the sub-inspector.
The HC said that the arrest of Kuldeep was illegal as the offences alleged against him did not warrant it. "No arrest should be made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation as to the genuineness and bona fide of the complaint/ information, as any arrest would deny a person of his liberty, which is a very serious matter, as arrest brings humiliation, curtails freedom and casts a scar forever."
The HC concluded its judgement with a quote from Martin Luther King Junior. "If an advocate could be treated in the manner of what he has been meted out in the case at hand, a common man will not be able to bear the burnt of repetition of such treatment. It is, therefore, the perpetrators of such illegality and violators of law, cannot be let off the hook. They must be proceeded against both in a departmental inquiry, to fix accountability and under criminal law to deter any such iteration as, "injustice anywhere; is a threat to justice everywhere" MLK Jr."
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Actress sexual assault: Court says Prosecution 'miserably' failed to prove conspiracy against Dileep
Kochi (PTI): The prosecution had "miserably" failed to prove the conspiracy charge against Dileep in the sensational 2017 actress sexual assault case, a local court has observed while citing inconsistencies and lack of sufficient evidence against the Malayalam star.
The full judgement of Ernakulam District and Principal Sessions Court Judge Honey M Varghese was released late on Friday, and has revealed the judge also pointing out at unsustainable arguments put forth by the prosecution.
"The prosecution miserably failed to prove the conspiracy between accused No.1 (Pulsar Suni) and accused No.8 (Dileep) in executing the offence against the victim," the court held.
It examined in detail, the prosecution's allegation that Dileep had hired the prime accused to sexually assault the survivor and record visuals, including close-up footage of a gold ring she was wearing, to establish her identity.
On page 1130 of the judgment, under paragraph 703, the court framed the issue as whether the prosecution's contention that NS Sunil (Pulsar Suni) recorded visuals of the gold ring worn by the victim at the time of the occurrence, so as to clearly disclose her identity, was sustainable.
The prosecution contended Dileep and Suni had planned the recording so that the actress' identity would be unmistakable, with the video of the gold ring intended to convince Dileep that the visuals were genuine.
However, the court noted that this contention was not stated in the first charge sheet and was introduced only in the second one.
As part of this claim, a gold ring was seized after the victim produced it before the police.
The court observed that multiple statements of the victim were recorded from February 18, 2017, following the incident, and that she first raised allegations against Dileep only on June 3, 2017.
Even on that day, nothing was mentioned about filming of the ring as claimed by the prosecution, the court said.
The prosecution failed to explain why the victim did not disclose this fact at the earliest available opportunities.
It further noted that although the victim had viewed the sexual assault visuals twice, she did not mention any specific recording of the gold ring on those occasions, which remained unexplained.
The court also examined the approvers' statements.
One approver told the magistrate that Dileep had instructed Pulsar Suni to record the victim's wedding ring.
The court observed that no such wedding ring was available with her at that time.
During the trial, the approver changed his version, the court said.
The Special Public Prosecutor put a leading question to the approver on whether Dileep had instructed the recording of the ring, after which he deposed that the instruction was to record it to prove the victim's identity.
The court observed that the approver changed his account to corroborate the victim's evidence.
When the same question was put to another approver, he repeated the claim during the trial but admitted he had never stated this fact before the investigating officer.
The court noted that the second approver even went to the extent of claiming Dileep had instructed the execution of the crime as the victim's engagement was over.
This showed that the evidence of the second approver regarding the shooting of the ring was untrue, as her engagement had taken place after the crime.
The court further observed that the visuals themselves clearly revealed the victim's identity and that there was no need to capture images of the ring to establish identity.
In paragraph 887, the court examined the alleged motive behind the crime and noted that in the first charge sheet, the prosecution had claimed that accused persons 1 to 6 had kidnapped the victim with the common intention of capturing nude visuals to extort money by threatening to circulate them and there was no mention about Dileep's role in it.
The court also rejected the prosecution's claim that the accused had been planning the assault on Dileep's instructions since 2013, noting that the allegation was not supported by reliable evidence.
It similarly ruled out the claim that Suni attempted to sexually assault the victim in Goa in January 2017, stating that witness statements showed no such misconduct when he served as the driver of the vehicle used by the actress there.
The court also discussed various controversies that followed Dileep's arrest and the evidence relied upon by the prosecution, ultimately finding that the case had not been proved.
Pronouning its verdict on the sensational case on December 8, the court acquitted Dileep and three others.
Later, the court sentenced six accused, including the prime accused Suni, to 20 years' rigorous imprisonment.
The assault on the multilingual actress, after the accused allegedly forced their way into her car and held it under their control for two hours on February 17, 2017, had shocked Kerala.
Pulsar Suni sexually assaulted the actress and video recorded the act with the help of the other convicted persons in the moving car.
