Kochi, March 25 The Kerala High Court on Tuesday orally slammed a Sub-Inspector of Police for issuing a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to the lawyer of the accused, summoning him for investigation.
The Sub-Inspector of Njarakkal near here, had, last month, arrested a couple hailing from West Bengal, alleging that they are Bangladeshi nationals and do not have proper documents, besides claiming that their Aadhaar, Election Identity Cards, and driving license are all forged.
The couple is now under judicial custody.
The police probe team issued a notice to the lawyer to submit all the documents of the couple, but had already submitted all the documents to a local court.
Later, the lawyer was issued a notice under Section 35 (3) BNSS to him, stating that as part of the investigation in the case the lawyer has to be questioned.
It was then that the lawyer approached the High Court, which asked the police officer to appear before it.
Slamming the action of the police officer, the court pointed out that a notice under Section 35 (3) can only be issued to a person when there is a reasonable suspicion that he has committed a cognisable offence.
"…He is an officer like you, an officer of this Court. How can you issue a 35 (3) notice to a lawyer who appeared for a client? If compensation is claimed, you will have to pay compensation. This is an Article 21 violation. What power do you have?" it observed orally.
The court further noted that notice was issued to the lawyer because the accused complained against the Sub-Inspector before the magistrate court's alleging that he was tortured in the police station.
It orally said that it would issue a detailed order in this matter, setting out directions to prevent the summoning of lawyers and to safeguard privileged communication.
The court also directed the Sub-Inspector to communicate with the lawyer and resolve the issue, warning him of the consequences of his action.
Just before the court rose for lunch, the Sub-Inspector handed over a letter to the court, submitting that the notice issued to the lawyer had been withdrawn.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor