SDPI, PFI extremist organisations indulging in acts of serious violence but not banned: Kerala High Court

While declining to order a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into murder of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) member A Sanjith, the Kerala High Court recently made some scathing observations regarding the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) and Popular Front of India (PFI) who are suspected to be behind the murder [Arshika S v State of Kerala]

. Justice K Haripal termed SDPI and PFI as extremist organisations. However, the Court observed that even though the members of such organisations are often part of violent events, the organisations are not banned and there isn't sufficient cause to suspect that the investigation conducted by the State Police is biased.

" No doubt, SDPI and PFI are extremist organisations indulging in serious acts of violence. All the same, those are not banned organisations. The Investigating Officer has denied the involvement of State level or national level leaders in the commission of the crime. Given the fact that police have taken care to file a final report within 90 days adds to their credibility and prove bona fides," the Court said.

. No doubt, SDPI and PFI are extremist organisations indulging in serious acts of violence. All the same, those are not banned organisations. Kerala High Court . The Court also observed that it is a common occurrence for SDPI and PFI members to be behind attacks on RSS members because of prolonged clashes between the groups.

" It is the common case that activists of the SDPI/PFI were behind the attack. There were clashes between the activists of the SDPI/PFI on the one hand and activists of the RSS on the other. There are series of attacks and counter attacks between them, " the judgment said.

. Further, it noted that even after Sanjith was murdered, the clashes between the groups have shown no signs of abating.

" This Court takes judicial notice of the fact that even after this incident, after completing arguments in this case, two such incidents have happened in Palakkad. Consequently, one person each of the rival groups have been killed, " the Court said.

. In the instant, the Court declined to transfer the investigation as it found that transferring the case to the CBI would only be detrimental to the case.

" If investigation is handed over to the CBI, that would result in further delay in the proceedings. It is not in public interest. That may also pave way for raising demand by the accused persons for releasing on bail. Given the mind set of the rival groups, if the accused persons are released on bail that would entail further clashes and may lead to law and order situation, " the judgment stated.

. The RSS worker from Palakkad district was hacked to death on November 15, 2021 while he was taking his wife to her workplace.

The State Police soon arrested several persons including an office bearer of the Popular Front of India (PFI).

The petition moved by his wife, S Arshika, alleged that the perpetrators of the gruesome murder of her husband were still at large.

It was contended that the investigation was at a stand-still even though there was proof of the involvement of activists of the SDPI and PFI.

The petitioner claimed that her husband and his co-workers opposed the extremist ideologies of SDPI and PFI who wanted to suppress the growth of RSS and propagated terrorism in the minds of innocents.

Considering the fact that there is a larger conspiracy in the murder of Sanjith and having regard to the national and international ramifications and the perfunctory manner of conducting investigation by the local police, it was contended that the investigation must be handed over to the CBI.

. The State opposed the plea and submitted that almost all the accused have been arrested and the final report is ready. It was also argued that if a new investigating agency comes in at this stage, the entire process will have to be repeated causing undue delays.

. The Court noted from the facts placed before it that it was the investigating agency that brought out the involvement of SDPI and PFI activists.

Further, it observed that the murder of Sanjith seemed to have been in retaliation to the murder of one Sakeer Hussain, an SDPI sympathizer.

Moreover, since the final report was filed less than 90 days after the crime, the accused were not able to get default bail either.

The Court opined that the investigation was not done in a lackadaisical manner as was alleged, and, therefore, declined to transfer the case to the CBI.

. However, the Court noted that some more accused are at large. Even though the roles allegedly played by them were less important, the Court said that they must be apprehended.

It, therefore, directed the State Police Chief to personally review the progress in apprehending the remaining accused and file fortnightly reports before the Court till the last accused is arrested.

. The petitioner was represented by Senior Advocate S Sreekumar , instructed by advocate P Martin Jose. The State was represented by Additional Director General of Prosecution Gracious Kuriakose , assisted by Senior Public Prosecutor CK Suresh. Central Government Counsel Suvin R Menon appeared on behalf of the Union of India.

. [Read Judgment]

SDPI, PFI extremist organisations indulging in acts of serious violence but not banned: Kerala High Court

Giti Pratap

Related Stories