Cops Can't Barge Into History Sheeters' Homes For 'Surveillance': Court
The Kerala High Court has held that the police have no right to knock on the doors of suspected persons or history sheeters or "barge" into their homes at night under the guise of surveillance.
The ruling by Justice V G Arun came on a plea by a man accused of threatening police officers from discharging their duties when they asked him to come out of his home late at night as part of night check on rowdy history sheeters.
Allowing the plea, the court quashed the FIR against the man and all further proceedings in connection with it, saying that "under the guise of surveillance, the police cannot knock on the doors or barge into the houses of history sheeters".
The court said that police officers should understand that the concept of home "transcends its physical manifestation as a dwelling and encompasses a rich tapestry of existential, emotional and social dimensions".
"In other words, every man's house is his castle or temple, the sanctity of which cannot be vilified by knocking on the door at odd hours. A person's right to life encompasses the right to live with dignity and dignity is non-negotiable," it said.
The court further said that under the Kerala Police Manual only 'informal watching' of history sheeters and 'close watch' over those leading criminal existence were permitted.
"Undoubtedly, neither of those expressions permit domicile visits at night," it added.
It also pointed out that under section 39 of the Kerala Police Act all persons are bound to comply with the 'lawful directions' of a police officer for discharge of his functions.
"Knocking on the doors of a history sheeter at midnight and demanding him to come out of the house cannot by any stretch of imagination be termed as a lawful direction," the court said.
Consequently, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the offence of threatening a police officer to obstruct him from discharging his duties under the Kerala Police Act for refusing to abide by the direction to come out of the house at night, the court added.
"If, as alleged, the petitioner had used derogatory language or threatened the police during the course of such refusal, his action may invite some other offence, but definitely not the offence he is presently charged with," it said.
The petitioner had claimed that he was implicated in the case to divert the enquiry ordered by the High Court into his complaint alleging police harassment.
The police had claimed that as part of their night check duty on rowdy history sheeters, officers had gone to ascertain if the petitioner was at home.
However, when he was asked to open the door of his home, he refused to do so and also abused and intimidated the officer, it had alleged.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
No permission to install idol on Sabarimala premises, TDB tells HC
The Kerala High Court has sought all files related to the alleged permission granted by the Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) to a private person to install an idol of Ayyappa at the Sabarimala temple. In a suo motu proceeding on Thursday, the Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. wanted the board to clarify whether it had issued permission to any one to install the idol. The Bench initiated the proceedings based on a report filed by R. Jayakrishnan, Sabarimala Special Commissioner, who noted that the TDB had permitted the chairperson of a multi-speciality hospital in Erode to install an idol of Ayyappa made of panchaloham, an alloy of five precious metals, at the temple, without hindering the temple structure and rituals. The report also took note of the distribution of pamphlets bearing bank account number, QR code and mobile numbers that said that a two-feet high idol weighing 108 kg and costing ₹9 lakh was to be installed there. A fundraising campaign also began, on the strength of the 'permission' granted by the TDB, creating an impression that he was authorised to do so by the TDB and the State government, the report said. The Sabarimala Tantri had informed the Special Commissioner that he was unaware of the alleged attempt to install the idol, which was against temple rituals. The Special Commissioner sought the interference of the court in the issue and stringent directions to stop such practices in the temple. The TDB submitted before the court that no permission was granted to the hospital's chairperson to install any idol on the temple premises. Neither was permission granted to collect money from the public, it contended. The court directed the TDB to issue an advisory in the Virtual-Q platform that it has not authorised anyone to install an idol of Ayyappa for worship on the temple premises or to collect money from the public for the purpose. The case has been listed for hearing on Friday.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Punjab & Haryana High Court Acquits Late MLA Om Prakash Hitler's Sons In 30-Year-Old Murder Case
The court set aside the 2004 conviction for the teenager's death. Om Prakash Hitler was an archrival of former Haryana chief minister Om Prakash Chautala In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has acquitted three sons of former Haryana MLA Om Prakash alias 'Om Prakash Hitler" in a 30-year-old murder case, citing serious doubts over the credibility of the prosecution's evidence and the possibility of political vendetta. The division bench comprising Justices Gurvinder Singh Gill and Jasjit Singh Bedi set aside the 2004 conviction of Manoj Kumar Sihag, Sanjay Sihag, and Sandeep Sihag, who were sentenced to life imprisonment for allegedly exhorting their father, Om Prakash, to shoot a 13-year-old boy, Jeet Ram, during a wedding celebration in February 1995. The fourth accused, Om Prakash, passed away during the pendency of the appeal. The incident dates back to February 26, 1995, when Jeet Ram, a teenager attending a wedding hosted by Om Prakash Hitler in village Chautala, sustained gunshot injuries and later died. An FIR was promptly registered under Section 304-A IPC for causing death by negligence, based on the victim's father Madan Lal's statement that the death resulted from accidental celebratory firing. An untraced report was accepted by the magistrate in 1996. However, over four years later, Madan Lal moved a fresh application in 1999, alleging that the death was not accidental but a deliberate murder committed by Om Prakash and his sons, following a verbal altercation at the event. This led to a reinvestigation and subsequent framing of murder charges under Sections 302 and 302/109 IPC. In 2004, the Sessions Court convicted all five accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment. Om Prakash and Darbara Singh, another co-accused, later died during the pendency of the appeal. The High Court expressed serious reservations about the timing and reliability of the prosecution's key witnesses, Duli Chand and Bhajan Lal, who surfaced only in 1999, over four years after the incident. The bench noted that both individuals were politically aligned with then-chief minister Om Prakash Chautala, a political rival of the accused, and had pending or past enmity with Om Prakash Hitler. The court observed that the initial FIR made no mention of any of the present appellants being responsible, and even in later statements, the credibility of witnesses appeared compromised. 'Apparently, the statement of this witness has been procured belatedly at the behest of the investigating agency possibly on account of political interference," the HC remarked. Furthermore, inconsistencies in ballistic evidence and the post-mortem report cast doubt on the prosecution's claim that a licensed .12 bore DBBL gun allegedly used by Om Prakash had caused the fatal injury. The firearm was only entered into the accused's licence record months after the incident. 'The evidence brought on record cannot be said to be of such sterling quality so as to unequivocally point towards the guilt of the accused," the bench ruled, emphasising that the delay in naming and examining key witnesses raised serious concerns about the integrity of the investigation. Setting aside the conviction and sentence passed by the Sessions Court in 2004, the High Court acquitted Manoj Kumar Sihag, Sanjay Sihag, and Sandeep Sihag of all charges. view comments First Published: July 16, 2025, 18:27 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Kerala HC stays proceedings against CM Vijayan over Nava Kerala Sadas violence
Kochi, Jul 17 (PTI) The Kerala High Court on Thursday stayed the proceedings initiated in a complaint seeking prosecution of Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan in connection with the violence that occurred during the state government's outreach programme — 'Nava Kerala Sadas' — in 2023. Justice V G Arun stayed the proceedings for three months on a plea moved by Vijayan seeking quashing of the complaint and a July 3 order of a magisterial court in connection with a speech made by him during the Nava Kerala Sadas. It also issued notice to the state government and the complainant and sought their stand on the plea by October 14. The High Court noted that there was, prima facie, substance in the CM's contention that the Chief Judicial Magistrate exceeded his jurisdiction by entertaining the complaint as the alleged incidents took place outside the territorial limits of the magisterial court in Ernakulam. The High Court also said that the contention, in Vijayan's plea, that the contents of his speech do not attract the offence under section 109 (punishment for abetment) of the IPC 'is also liable to be considered". With the observations, the High Court said, 'Hence, there shall be an interim stay of further proceedings in CMP No.4322 of 2024 (complaint against the CM) pending on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam, for three months." The court of Ernakulam Chief Judicial Magistrate had on July 3 observed that a prima facie case did exist, but sanction for prosecution was required from the Governor to register a case against the CM. The observation came on the complaint by Ernakulam District Congress Committee (DCC) president Muhammed Shiyas seeking registration of a case against Vijayan in connection with the various instances of violence during the state government's outreach programme in 2023. The magisterial court was scheduled to take up the matter next on November 1. In his plea seeking quashing of the complaint and the July 3 order, Vijayan has said that the matter relates to a speech made by him on November 20, 2023 during the outreach programme with regard to Youth Congress activists allegedly obstructing his convoy. In his plea, the CM said that he only praised the bystanders who prevented the protestors from falling in front of the moving bus in which he was travelling and described their conduct as 'life saving". 'The petitioner (CM) did not endorse violence or call for retaliation," the petition has said. Subsequently, three 'stray incidents of political violence" occurred in different districts between November 30, 2023 and December 16, 2023 and the police registered FIRs against unnamed persons in those cases, the petition said. The FIRs did not name or implicate the CM, but the complainant filed a private complaint before the magisterial court alleging that Vijayan's speech amounted to abetment of those incidents, it said. 'Though the police submitted a report stating that no material was found against the petitioner (CM), the magistrate rejected the negative report and opined that the petitioner's speech prima facie amounts to instigation of criminal offences," it further said. The CM, in his plea, has claimed that the magisterial court's order was 'grossly erroneous and liable to be set aside" as it did not have the jurisdiction to deal with the matter and there was no factual or evidentiary material linking the petitioner's speech with the incidents of violence. The petition also claimed that the magistrate 'failed to apply his judicial mind, ignored material inconsistencies and conducted no preliminary enquiry into the FIRs or surrounding facts". Kerala Students Union and Youth Congress workers were allegedly assaulted by activists of the CPI(M)'s Democratic Youth Federation of India and the security personnel of the CM at various places across the state for showing black flags to Vijayan during the outreach programme. PTI HMP HMP KH view comments First Published: July 17, 2025, 19:15 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
