In a setback for the Kerala CPI(M), the High Court on Thursday upheld the charges the CBI had slapped on the party’s Kannur district secretary, P Jayarajan, and other accused under provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in the case pertaining to the brutal murder of RSS leader Elanthodath Manoj at Kathiroor, Kannur in 2014.
The court upheld the CBI act by rejecting a plea filed by Jayarajan and five of his co-accused seeking quashing of the charges under UAPA against them. They had argued that the CBI had invoked UAPA provisions against them without the State Government’s clearance. Jayarajan, chief of the CPI(M)’s strongest district unit in the country, is the 25th accused in the case.
Justice B Kemal Pasha of the High Court rejected the petition by pointing out that the charges slapped on Jayarajan and others under UAPA would stay as the Central agency had the authority to invoke the provisions with the approval of the Union Government and that there was no need for the agency to seek the State Government’s clearance. The court, however, partially upheld a petition filed by accused 1 to 19 of the case questioning the CBI act of slapping on them charges under the UAPA before getting clearance from the Central Government. The High Court said the validity of this could be examined during trial. There are a total of 25 accused in the case and all of them are CPI(M) men.
The judge also came down heavily on the CPI(M)-led lDF Government for allegedly supporting the plea of Jayarajan and others through an affidavit which said the CBI should have sought its nod before invoking UAPA. The Government also claimed that the case did not warrant invocation of UAPA as it did not involve issues concerning national security.
Asking the Government whether it was trying to protect the accused, the court said the CBI need not seek its clearance as it had the Centre’s nod. The court said the State Government was being more loyal than the king as it was perhaps showing more interest with regard to the issue of UAPA than the accused.
The judge had on Tuesday itself orally observed that there was no need for the agency to wait for the State’s permission to invoke UAPA.