Kerala High Court sets up grievance redressal panels for lawyer-police conflicts

The Kerala High Court recently issued guidelines to regulate the conduct of police officers within court premises and reduce clashes between lawyers and the police across the State. [Suo Motu, High Court of Kerala v State of Kerala & ors]

Notably, the Division Bench of Justices AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Jobin Sebastian ordered the constitution of grievance redressal committees at both the State and district levels to address disputes between lawyers and the police. Both committees will include members of the Bar and the police force.

At the State level, the committee will comprise of the Advocate General, three members of the Bar nominated by the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association (KHCAA) including the KHCAA President, the Director General of Police, and a Superintendent of Police (SP). If the allegations are against an SP, a senior officer nominated by the Director General of Police will be in the committee instead of the SP.

At the district level, the panel will include the Principal District Judge, District Police Chief, District Government Pleader and two members of the local Bar association including its president.

"The deliberations of the Committees as constituted above shall be held at venues identified as convenient for all the stakeholders. Disputes or grievances that cannot be resolved at the District Level shall be escalated to the State Level and resolved by the State Level Committee," the Court stated.

The Bench passed the order on a suo motu public interest litigation (PIL) petition initiated on the basis of a letter from the KHCAA highlighting an altercation between an advocate and police officials at the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court at Ramankary in Alappuzha district. The incident had sparked widespread protests and boycott by nearly 15 bar associations across Kerala.

According to the guidelines now issued by the Court, arrests within court premises must be generally done only after prior intimation to the presiding judicial officer. When a person intends to surrender before court, the police should not apprehend that person without the permission of the presiding officer.

However, in emergency situations, such as preventing a crime or catching an absconding accused in a warrant case, the police could take immediate action. In such cases, the presiding officer must be apprised of the situation immediately after arrest is made.

"Police may arrest or use necessary force to arrest persons in court premises in emergent situations necessitating immediate action in order to prevent the occurrence of a cognizable offence within the court premises. Police can also arrest absconding persons/accused in long pending warrant matters in the court premises. However, intimation of arrest of persons in both of the aforementioned circumstances must be given to the presiding officer of the court immediately after the arrest," the Court stated.

The Court also clarified that 'court premises' in this context includes not just the courtroom, but also all land, buildings and structures (except residential quarters) connected with court proceedings during working hours.

The matter will be taken up after two months for further consideration.

Senior Advocates Santosh Mathew and BG Harindranath and KHCAA President Yeshwanth Shenoy appeared in the matter.

Additional Director General of Prosecution Grashious Kuriakose appeared for the State and its authorities.

[Read Order]