Fake Antiques Case: IG G Lakshman moves Kerala High Court alleging extra-constitutional authority working in CMO; seeks quashing of FIR

Inspector General (IG) of Kerala Police G Lakshman has approached the Kerala High Court to quash the case registered against him for his alleged involvement in a cheating case connected to notorious fake antiques dealer Monson Mavunkal [Gugulloth Lakshman IPS v State of Kerala & Anr.]..The IPS officer claimed that his name was not included in the initial petition filed by the victims before Chief Minister (CM) Pinarayi Vijayan, but that it was added to the first information report (FIR) later by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (DySP). The DySP was acting at the behest of an unnamed extra-constitutional authority pulling strings in the Chief Minister's office (CM)), he alleged. "It appears that in the hon'ble Chief Minister's Office an extra ordinary constitutional authority is functioning and he is dealing with, compromising, mediating and arbitrating some of the financial dealings in the State of Kerala...That invisible hands and extra constitutional brain is operating behind the curtain and commanding the second respondent (Deputy Superintendent of Police) for doing this kind of illegal activities (sic)," Lakshman's petition stated.It is also alleged that this same extra-constitutional authority has been resolving some disputes sent by the High Court to various authorities for arbitration. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan, on July 24, directed the Public Prosecutor to get instructions from the respondents and posted the matter for hearing on August 8..Monson Mavunkal gained notoriety in Kerala after news reports surfaced that he had allegedly conned several people of over ₹10 crores through his fake antique scam.A crime was registered against Mavunkal on 23 September 2021. However, this year, on June 14, IG Lakshman along with the president of the Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC), K Sudhakaran, were arrayed as accused in the case by the Deputy Superintendent of Police..The First Information Report (FIR) initially registered against Mavunkal alleged commission of offences punishable under sections 468 (Forgery), 471 (using as genuine a forged document), and 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).In his plea, Lakshman said that his name was not included when the FIR was initially registered against Mavunkal who is the prime accused in the case.However, on June 9, the DySP filed a report before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court arraying the IG as the third accused in the said case as well as adding offences under sections 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 34 (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention), the plea stated.Lakshman contended that the “uncontroverted allegation” in the FIR registered against him won't constitute an offence as there was no material to prove any criminal intention and motive on his part.“It appears that the petitioner is falsely implicated in the above case after getting a 164 statement from a person. Whether the petitioner was present at the time in the alleged place was not at all enquired into and investigated by the 2nd respondent (Deputy Superintendent of Police). Without any scientific investigation, the petitioner was made an accused in the above case,” the plea said.He also highlighted the delay in arraying him as an accused in the case against Mavunkal."Arraying the petitioner as an accused after 24 months of the registration of the crime without a piece of incriminating material is nothing but an abuse of the process of law. The petitioner having meritorious service records is thrown into the controversy for reasons best known to the political bosses of the 2nd respondent (Deputy Superintendednt of Police-II)", the petition stated. .IG Lakshman was represented by advocates Noble Mathew and Sangeetha S.