The Kerala High Court has sought verification from the State authorities regarding compliance with its earlier order in a contempt petition filed by film producer Sheela Kurian against Deputy Superintendent of Police Madhu Babu. The Court has directed the Public Prosecutor to ascertain whether the directions issued earlier by the Court had been complied with and to place the findings before it for further consideration.
The matter relates to an earlier order of the High Court in which the Inspector General of Police, Ernakulam Range, was directed to consider a representation submitted by the petitioner seeking action against the Deputy Superintendent of Police. The representation was based on allegations made by the petitioner regarding the conduct of the police officer during an interaction connected with her complaint.
In the present proceedings, the Court was informed that compliance with the earlier direction had not been clearly verified. The Court therefore required the State to confirm whether the order had been acted upon in accordance with its directions. The Bench emphasized that judicial orders must be implemented in both letter and spirit and that any lapse in compliance must be properly examined.
The Court noted that the contempt petition was filed on the ground that its earlier directions had not been fully complied with by the concerned authorities. It therefore considered it necessary to ensure that the order passed earlier was properly executed before proceeding further in the contempt proceedings.
During the hearing, the Public Prosecutor appeared on behalf of the State and sought time to obtain instructions regarding the status of compliance. The Court accepted the request and granted time for verification. It directed the Public Prosecutor to specifically ascertain whether the Inspector General of Police had considered the representation as directed earlier.
The Court also indicated that the matter would be taken up after the submission of the verification report. It fixed a future date for further consideration, making it clear that the issue of compliance would be examined before deciding on any further action in the contempt petition.
The underlying grievance of the petitioner pertains to allegations concerning the conduct of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Madhu Babu, during her visit to the police office in connection with a complaint. The petitioner had earlier approached the Court seeking intervention after alleging that her representations had not been properly acted upon by the police authorities.
The High Court’s present order is limited to ensuring procedural compliance with its earlier directions. It has not expressed any final view on the merits of the allegations but has focused on verifying whether the administrative authorities have followed the judicial mandate issued earlier.
The contempt proceedings remain pending, with the Court awaiting confirmation from the State regarding compliance with its previous order before proceeding further in the matter.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.