The Kerala High Court has granted interim protection from arrest to Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) president K Sudhakaran in a cheating case involving controversial antique dealer Monson Mavunkal.
While considering an anticipatory bail application filed by KPCC president Sudhakaran, a single bench of Justice Ziyad Rahman AA on Friday directed the counsel for the police that no persuasive steps should be taken against Sudhakaran until the next hearing of the matter on June 21.
“No coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner till the next posting date. Post the matter on June 21,” the court said.
In his plea seeking anticipatory bail, Sudhakaran contended that there was no allegation against him in the First Information Report (FIR) which was registered by the police in 2021 based on a complaint received in 2018.
The Crime Branch, on 10 June 2023, issued a notice to Sudhakaran stating that they had received certain ‘credible information’ and had ‘reasonable suspicion’ regarding his involvement in the said crime. The Crime branch probe team asked Sudhakaran to appear before them on14 June.
However, the petitioner avers that he had certain pre-arranged priorities and consultations due to which he was unable to do so. He claims he had informed the Crime branch of the same vide a letter dated 13 June 2023, and sought another date to appear.
The Congress Kerala chief claimed in his plea that prima facie the notice issued to him to be present in person before the Crime Branch “appears to have been for extraneous reasons and political compulsion best known to the police authorities”.
Sudhakaran further said that the notice was issued under Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code, which gives the police powers to arrest the person whether he complies or not with the notice.
The Crime Branch wing of Kerala Police have on Monday named Congress Kerala chief K Sudhakaran as the second accused in the Monson Mavunkal fake antique fraud case. The probe team on Monday submitted its report to the Ernakulam Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
The plea claimed that Sudhakaran apprehends that the issuance of notice to him almost two years later is a ploy to drag him into the controversy and tarnish his social image which he developed after having served many years as a public servant.
He also argued that custodial interrogation was unnecessary as there is no substance in the allegation and no culpable element is made out against him.