The Supreme Court appointed by the Supreme Court to prosecute police officers for causing “serious abuse” and “immeasurable sorrow” to ISRO scientist Dr Nambi Narayanan in a 1994 intelligence case has sent its report to the high court, sources said.
On 14th September 2018 the SC appointed a three-member team led by its former judge D K Jain while directing the Kerala government to pay ₹ 50 lakh compensation for forcing Narayanan to be severely humiliated.
The scientist was arrested while Congress was leading the government in Kerala. The panel, after an investigation, filed its report on the closed cover of the high court recently.
The CBI, in its investigation, had claimed that police officers at the time in Kerala were responsible for Narayanan’s illegal detention.
The case was also marred by political infighting, and at some point in the ANC it was directed at the then caretaker Minister Karunakaran over the issue, which eventually led to his resignation.
For almost two and a half years, a team led by Judge Jain investigated the circumstances that led to his arrest.
The intelligence case, which was in the news in 1994, involved allegations of the transmission of certain secret documents of the Indian space program abroad by two and four other scientists, including two Maldivian women.
The 79-year-old scientist, who was awarded a pure certificate by the CBI, emphasized that the Kerala police had “committed” the crime and that the technology he allegedly stole and sold in the 1994 case was not available at the time.
Narayanan was appearing in the high court against the Kerala High Court ruling that “no action should be taken” against former DGP Siby Mathews, then led by a team of SIT investigators, retired police chiefs, KK Joshua and S Vijayan, then Deputy Director, i -Intelligence Bureau, RB Shreekumar, who was later indicted by the CBI for illegally arresting scientists.
In its decision-making process, the Supreme Court stated, “We think the current situation calls for a constitutional committee to find ways and means to take appropriate action against offending authorities.”
A bench headed by then Chief Justice Dipak Misra criminal law first came into operation without a basis. It was introduced, if one is allowed to say, in one way or another.
He said that they are of the view that the complainant has been detained and detained for almost 50 days. His arrest has been widely criticized in the CBI closure report.
The ruling said “every prosecutor” initiated by state police “was dangerous and had caused great suffering and immeasurable sorrow” to Narayanan. “It can be said with certainty” that the basic right to life and personal freedom of Narayanan “was deeply affected”.
The CBI, while giving a fresh perspective to the scientist, had said Siby Mathews had left “all investigations to the IB dedicating his work” and ordered the arbitrary arrest of that scientist and others without sufficient evidence.
The case came to light in October 1994, when a Maldivian man Rasheeda was arrested in Thiruvananthapuram on suspicion of possessing secret drawings of ISRO rocket engines to be sold to Pakistan.
Narayanan, then director of a proyogenic project at the ISRO, was arrested along with then-ISRO Deputy Director who was D Sasikumaran, and Fousiya Hasan, who was a Maldivian friend from Rasheeda.
The Supreme Court reported that the police action taken against a former Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) scientist was “a form of psychotherapy”.
It was said that his “freedom and dignity”, which was the basis of his rights, was at stake during his imprisonment and, in the end, despite all the glory of the past, he was forced to face “absurd disgust”.
Giving compensation ₹ 50 lakh, which would be paid by the state government, the high court said it was given to compensate for his suffering, anxiety and treatment.
The Supreme Court has ruled that “a person’s reputation is an indisputable fact of his right to dignity” and has rejected the Kerala government’s claim that due to the expiration of its term, no further investigation or necessary action should be taken against defrauding officials.
It accepted Narayanan’s request that the authorities, who were responsible for creating a “negative impact” on his mind, should face “legal consequences”.