Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

"Imposition of Compensation on Police Officers Under Section 250 Cr.P.C. 'Irregular and Liable to be Set Aside,' Rules Kerala High Court"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgement, the Kerala High Court has ruled that imposing compensation on a Sub Inspector of Police under Section 250 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) after the acquittal of the accused is "irregular and liable to be set aside."

The Honourable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas delivered the decision on 16th August 2023, setting aside the imposition of compensation on Sub Inspector S.Sukumaran Chettiyar. The case had been registered under Section 51(A) of the Kerala Police Act, 1960, accusing an Advocate of disorderly behavior and uttering obscene words in public.

The case gained attention due to the personal rivalry between the Sub Inspector and the accused Advocate. The Magistrate had initially found that the medical certificate did not mention any smell of alcohol, raising questions about the validity of the case. A false certificate was later produced, further complicating matters.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed, "The provision does not contemplate an action against a police officer on whose report the cognizance was taken as distinguished from a case instituted upon a complaint or upon information given to a police officer." The court emphasized that compensation under Section 250 Cr.P.C. is a "special provision enacted to meet the specific contingencies mentioned therein."

The judgement also referred to previous cases, including Balakrishnan Nambiar v. State of Kerala, Krishnan Moopan M.B. v. The State of Kerala and Another, and Pankajakshan P.R. v. K.Muraleedharan and Another, to support its decision.

This ruling is expected to have significant implications for the police force and the legal community, as it clarifies the limitations of Section 250 Cr.P.C. in imposing compensation on police officers.

 

Date of Decision 16th August 2023

S.SUKUMARAN vs STATE OF KERALA

Latest Legal News