KOCHI: Observing that the allegations against lawyer Saiby Jose Kidangoor, that he accepted money as bribe for judges, were serious, the Kerala High Court on Monday asked him to face the investigation and prove his innocence. “Why are you hurrying? Why are you afraid? Why do you run away? Face the investigation and prove your innocence,” Justice Kauser Edappagath remarked, when Saiby’s petition to quash the FIR against him came up for hearing.
The judge also refused to pass an interim order directing the police not to arrest Saiby, the president of the Kerala High Court Advocates’ Association. “Why should we shut down the probe? The allegations...are very serious. True or not, they are...maligning the entire justice delivery system,” he said.
The police had initiated further inquiry after filing the FIR. “The next day, you (Saiby) rushed to court. You are an officer of the court and an office-bearer of an association. It’s your responsibility to prove your innocence and remove the shadow cast on the entire judicial system. Why can’t you face the investigation,” asked Justice Kauser.
S Sreekumar, Saiby’s counsel, said the probe was initiated on charges raised by four advocates. The affected persons did not lodge a complaint, said the counsel, to which Justice Kauser said it was not necessary under criminal law.
Saiby told to move court after final report is filed
When the counsel highlighted that the Kochi police commissioner is the complainant, the judge said the HC registrar general had forwarded the complaint based on which the police conducted a preliminary inquiry. “It’s something affecting the judicial system. It is the responsibility of the state machinery, including the police, to set the law in motion. Suppose an anonymous letter is received, the police have the right to look into it,” the judge said. Sreekumar argued that Saiby was booked based on false allegations and the media was celebrating it.
Terming Saiby’s petition premature, Justice Kauser urged him to “come after filing the final report.” “Then, you may have a good case. Were this against the final report, I could have admitted and stayed it. But it is too early,” he said.
In a case where the informant doesn’t support the investigation, can’t it be proved through other means? There is an allegation that the petitioner (Saiby) collected money from clients to bribe judicial officers. Is it not an offence that falls within Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act or 420 (cheating) of IPC? Does it not disclose a cognisable offence?
He also asked what was on record to show that the persons who allegedly gave money did not support the prosecution.
Saiby’s petition said the police questioned another person in connection with the allegation. To this, the judge said, “You admit that there is another person. Let the police find out whether the person is telling the truth or not.” The petitioner’s counsel said if this is the way an FIR is registered, any advocate can be made a scapegoat for this kind of an allegation.
While concluding the hearing, the judge asked whether any coercive action will be taken against Saiby. The prosecution said it will not proceed against him for the time being.