The State police on Wednesday reportedly came to the view that the investigating officer in the Edappal child molestation case in Malappuram district had erred in arresting the owner of the cinema theatre where the crime occurred on April 18.
They have transferred investigating officer Shaji Varghese, Dy.SP-SCRB, Malappuram, from his post.
Mr. Varghese had controversially summoned theatre owner Satheeshan to the Changaramkulam police station on the ground that he had prevented his manager, who is the custodian of the video output from the cameras, from submitting the evidence to the police.
Mr. Varghese had subsequently arrested him on the suspicion of attempting to conceal the crime from law enforcers. His controversial action triggered a political storm that had the government running for cover in the Assembly. The Opposition said Satheeshan’s arrest sends a wrong message to society and the public would shrink away from reporting offences against women and children to the police.
Officials said that IG, Thrissur Range, M.R. Ajith Kumar had, at the behest of State Police Chief Loknath Behera, investigated Mr. Varghese’s motive for arresting the businessman. He had found that Mr. Satheeshan, had no “mala fide intent” to suppress the offence.
Mr. Satheeshan had not prevented his friend Raveendran from reporting the offence to a school counsellor, though belatedly. He directed his manager to give the recording to the counsellor who in turn gave it to childline staff with the knowledge that it would be handed over to the local police.
The theatre owner’s actions did not, on the face of it, point to suppression of evidence or non-reporting of an offence. At worst, he could be held liable for a serious omission.
Top officials said the investigating officer should have sought legal opinion to assess the legal liability, if any, of Mr. Satheeshan instead of booking him straight away. They were verifying whether District Police Chief, Malappuram, Pratheesh Kumar, had prior knowledge of Mr. Varghese’s intention to arrest Mr. Satheeshan and whether he had okayed it without proper application of mind.