Bringing into the open yet another instance of political interference in the functioning of the police force, Kerala’s former Director General of Police TP Senkumar had approached the Supreme Court in February, accusing the state’s Left Democratic Front (LDF) government of victimising him for carrying out an impartial investigation in the district of Kunnur.
Senkumar alleged that he was removed from the top police post soon after the LDF had come to power, last May. The state government had cited Senkumar’s inaction in a case of brutal rape and murder of a law student, Jisha, in Kochi last year as the reason.
Senkumar alleged that the real reason was not this case, but the earlier Kunnur temple tragedy case, in which he could not be implicated at all and for which he was transferred. He sought quashing of the transfer order, citing it as illegal and unsustainable and pleaded for permission to continue as the state’s police chief.
At the court of Justices Madan B Lokur and Sanjay Kishan Kaul on March 30 Dushyant Dave, the petitioner’s counsel, submitted that the Supreme Court, in a number of cases, had observed that to secure the larger public interest, it was necessary to keep the police forces insulated from political interference.
He argued that it was essential to secure the rule of law. He further stated that the court, in the case of Prakash Singh (Case of Police Reforms: Prakash Singh vs Union of India), had framed guidelines to constitute State Security Commissions for this very purpose so that the police could work in an impartial manner.
Dave also submitted that Senkumar had been an outstanding officer who had received Grade-A ACRs throughout his career and had never been accused of dereliction of duty or corruption. The state government, however, had shunted him out by not following any of the CCS Rules or other guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court from time to time.
Senior Advocate Harish Salve, appearing for the respondent state, submitted that he needed a week’s time to find out as to what all procedures had been followed by the inquiry commission and the material relied upon by the state government.
Dave submitted that the petitioner was not responsible for the temple tragedy in Kunnur as he had no role to play in granting of permission and security management. He further submitted that he was being victimised and made a scapegoat by the present government.
Salve said the person at the top had to take the responsibility when such a big tragedy takes place because of the negligence of the police authorities.
Dave replied that by this logic, the chief minister should resign as at least 13 political murders had taken place in the state since the present government came to power. He further submitted that the chief minister had made a statement in the state assembly that the police was not responsible for the murder of Jisha and after such a statement how could they victimise the petitioner?
The matter was listed for April 10.
—By India Legal Bureau