"Kerala High Court Directs Issuance of Certified Copies: ‘Petitioner is Entitled to the Documents Sought For’* Under Legal Precedents"
Kiran Raj
The Kerala High Court Single Bench of Justice Kauser Edappagath, issued an order directing the issuance of certified copies of various documents related to a criminal writ petition. The court recorded that the petitioner, an accused in the case under investigation, had the legal right to obtain copies of the memorandum of the writ petition, exhibits, counter affidavits, reply affidavits, statements filed by parties, and the final judgment.
The matter arose from Crime No. 1149 of 2024 registered at Kannur Town Police Station, which was the subject of the writ petition. The petitioner, a third party to the proceedings, had sought certified copies of the memorandum of the writ petition, exhibits produced by the writ petitioner, as well as other documents including counter affidavits, reply affidavits, statements filed by parties, and the certified copy of the final judgment.
Also Read: Supreme Court Restricts Reduction of Forest Land Without Compensatory Afforestation
The court, while considering the application, recorded that the petitioner’s request was legally supported. It stated, “Going by the decisions of this Court in Sree Narayana Dharma Sangham Trust v. Surendranath and Ors. [2022 (6) KHC 33] and Vivek Nair v. Puravankara Projects Limited [2017 (3) KHC 387], the petitioner is entitled for the documents sought for.”
The interlocutory application, I.A. No. 1 of 2025, was filed by P.P. Divya, who was not an original party to the writ petition but sought access to the case documents. The respondents in the matter included the original writ petitioner, Manjusha K, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the State of Kerala, the Station House Officer of Kannur Town Police Station, and the Inspector of the Special Investigation Team investigating the case.
The petitioner’s counsel submitted that access to judicial records is a legally recognized right and that the petitioner required certified copies of the requested documents for legal purposes. The affidavit filed along with the application outlined the necessity of obtaining these records.
The petitioner sought certified copies of the memorandum of the writ petition and all associated documents, including exhibits, affidavits, statements, and the judgment in W.P. (Crl.) No. 1297 of 2024. The court examined the request in light of previous judicial decisions governing access to judicial records and accordinlgy directed the Registry to issue the requested documents. The order stated, “The Registry is directed to issue certified copies of the documents mentioned above in terms of the direction in Sree Narayana Dharma Sangham Trust (supra).”
The High Court examined the request based on the legal precedents cited by the petitioner. It recorded that the petitioner was an accused in the crime that formed the subject matter of the writ petition. The order stated, “The petitioner is the accused in Crime No. 1149 of 2024 of Kannur Town Police Station, which is the subject matter of W.P. (Crl) No. 1297 of 2024.”
After examining the documents and submissions, the court concluded that the petitioner had the legal right to obtain the certified copies sought. The order recorded, “The petitioner has sought for the certified copy of the memorandum of writ petition along with exhibits produced by the writ petitioner and also the documents, counter affidavit, reply affidavit, and statements, if any, filed by the parties in the writ petition along with the certified copy of the judgment in W.P. (Crl) No. 1297 of 2024 of this Court.”
The court, referring to the precedents cited, held that the petitioner was entitled to these documents. The judgment noted that the court had previously determined the rights of parties to obtain judicial records in similar matters.
The court issued a clear directive to the Registry, instructing it to provide the certified copies as requested by the petitioner. It stated, “The Registry is directed to issue certified copies of the documents mentioned above in terms of the direction in Sree Narayana Dharma Sangham Trust (supra).”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Applicant (Third Party): K. Viswan, Arun Bose D., P.S. Pooja, Advocates
For the Petitioner in W.P. (Crl.): John Sebastian Ralph, Ralph Reti John, Vishnu Chandran,Mary Greeshma, Geethu T.A., Giridhar Krishna Kumar, Liz Johny, Krishnapriya Sreekumar, Advocates
For the Central Bureau of Investigation (R2 in IA/R1 in W.P. (Crl.)): K.P. Satheesan, Senior Advocate, Bharath Mohan, Special Public Prosecutor (CBI)
For the State of Kerala and Other Respondents (R3 to R5 in IA/R2 to R4 in W.P. (Crl.)): Director General of Prosecution, P.N. Narayanan, Additional Public Prosecutor, Sajju S., Senior Public Prosecutor
Case Title: P.P. Divya v. Manjusha K & Ors.
Case Number: I.A. No. 1 of 2025 in W.P. (Crl.) No. 1297 of 2024
Bench: Justice Kauser Edappagath
[Read/Download order]
