'Who will believe this theory? Who are police protecting?': HC questions police in Nithin Raj case

KOCHI: The Kerala High Court has launched a scathing attack on the police force, accusing officers of conspiring to protect the prime accused teacher, Dr. Ram, in the death of Anjarakandy Dental College student Nithin Raj.

Hearing a petition filed by the victim’s parents, Latha and Rajan, Justice A. Badharudeen questioned the fundamental purpose of the police, asking whether they existed to harass the poor while shielding the influential, and warning that the public and rulers are watching these actions. The court expressed deep indignation over the circumstances that paved the way for Dr. Ram’s quick release following his arrest.

Justice Badharudeen stated that investigators must be suspected of having accepted kickbacks, remarking that the old adage about money ruling supreme had been proven right. Describing the episode as a failure of the administrative system, the single bench warned that Dr. Ram's release must be thoroughly investigated, failing which the High Court would issue formal orders, including directives to examine the call records of individuals connected to the accused.

Rejecting the government's submission that the police made every possible effort to trace the fugitive's hideout, the court remarked that officers merely accompanied the accused wherever he went before staging an arrest when he came forward to surrender, thereby creating loopholes for his release. The bench also dismissed the police theory that Nithin died by suicide due to an inability to repay a loan application debt, pointedly asking who could possibly believe such a finding.

The court further noted that presenting the accused before the Thalassery court without notifying the reasons for arrest—a mandatory Supreme Court guideline—was part of a deliberate conspiracy orchestrated at the upper echelons of the police department. The bench observed that Deputy Superintendents of Police (DySPs) who routinely bypass arrest procedures to protect suspects do not deserve to continue in service, adding that lower courts must strictly scrutinize such actions.

In connection with the proceedings, the High Court ordered Crime Branch SP K.V. Venugopal and DySP Sudhir to appear in court with relevant documents. They have been directed to submit affidavits detailing how arrest procedures were followed. Additionally, the Thalassery court judge must submit a report verifying whether mandatory checks were conducted, and a copy of the order must be submitted to the bail court.
The matter has been posted for further hearing on Friday.