D K Ravi death probe turns into debate on freedom of speech

The debate has been triggered in the Karnataka high court by a writ petition filed by the husband of an IAS officer who approached the police with key information over the death of her batchmate D K Ravi — including a final suicidal message.

A case that began as an investigation into the unnatural death of IAS officer D K Ravi has now evolved into a legal battle over the question of whether the judiciary can curb the unfettered freedom of speech enjoyed by the legislature when the personal privacy of an individual is involved.

The debate has been triggered in the Karnataka high court by a writ petition filed by the husband of an IAS officer who approached the police with key information over the death of her batchmate D K Ravi — including a final suicidal message.

With the high court issuing an interim order preventing the government from presenting a status report on the probe in the state Assembly, the government has raised the question as to whether the privilege of the legislature to unfettered freedom of speech under Article 194 of the Constitution has been violated by the court order.

The high court issued the restraining order on a plea by Sudhir Reddy, the husband of IAS officer Rohini Sindhuri, against the violation of his privacy if the state publicises the interim CID report.

State advocate general Prof Ravi Varma Kumar has stated the petitioner obtained a restraining order by ingeniously leaving out the fact that the interim report was going to be presented in the legislature.

He argued that no democracy can survive without absolute freedom of speech for the legislature. In response, senior counsel Sajjan Poovaya, appearing for the petitioner, has argued that the freedom of speech enjoyed by the legislature is not absolute but subject to the provisions of the Constitution, including the right to privacy of an individual.

Justice S Abdul Nazeer, who is hearing the matter, has steered the arguments towards the question of whether there is any provision in criminal law for presenting any interim report once the process of investigation begins with an inquest by a magistrate and culminates in a final report.

Though the court has suggested disposal of the petition on account of the government handing over the probe to the CBI, the advocate general has argued that the question of whether the powers of the legislature can be curtailed must be addressed.

“Publication on the floor of the house cannot be stopped,” the advocate general said.

He said that there could be no greater travesty of justice than the suppression of the interim findings of the probe from the legislature.

The senior counsel appearing for the deceased IAS officer’s friend filed objections Tuesday to the state’s request for withdrawal of the order restraining the state from presenting investigation findings in the Assembly.

The matter has been posted for its next hearing on March 26.

Source:: Indian Express