ISRO espionage case | High-level probe panel submits report to SC on Nambi Narayanan’s illegal arrest

A high-level probe panel appointed by the Supreme Court to take erring cops to process for inflicting “tremendous harassment” and “immeasurable anguish” to ISRO scientist Dr. Nambi Narayanan within the 1994 espionage case has submitted its report to the apex courtroom, sources stated.

Also learn: Beyond recompense: on the ISRO spy case

The Supreme Court had on September 14, 2018 appointed the three-member panel headed by its former decide D.K. Jain whereas directing the Kerala government to cough up ₹50 lakh compensation for compelling Mr. Narayanan to bear “immense humiliation”.

Also learn: Panel probing ISRO ‘frame up’ case to begin work in two days

The scientist was arrested when the Congress was heading the federal government in Kerala. The panel, after investigation, submitted its report in a sealed cowl to the apex courtroom not too long ago.

The CBI, in its probe, had held that the then prime police officers in Kerala had been answerable for Mr. Narayanan’s illegal arrest.

The case additionally had its political fallout, with a piece within the Congress focusing on the then Chief Minister late K. Karunakaran over the difficulty, that ultimately led to his resignation.

Over a interval of just about two-and-a-half years, the panel headed by Justice Jain examined the circumstances main to the arrest.

The espionage case, which had hit the headlines in 1994, pertained to allegations of switch of sure confidential paperwork on India’s house programme to international international locations by two scientists and 4 others, together with two Maldivian ladies.

The 79-year-old former scientist, who was given a clear chit by the CBI, maintained that the Kerala Police had “fabricated” the case and the know-how he was accused to have stolen and bought within the 1994 case didn’t even exist at the moment.

Mr Narayanan had approached the apex courtroom towards a Kerala High Court judgement that stated “no action needed to be taken” towards former DGP Siby Mathews, who was then heading the SIT probe group, two retired superintendents of police, K K Joshua and S Vijayan, and the then Deputy Director, Intelligence Bureau, R.B. Shreekumar, who had been later held accountable by the CBI for the scientist’s illegal arrest.

The apex courtroom in its judgement had stated, “We think that the obtaining factual scenario calls for constitution of a committee to find out ways and means to take appropriate steps against the erring officials.” “The criminal law was set in motion without any basis. It was initiated, if one is allowed to say, on some kind of fancy or notion,” a bench headed by the then Chief Justice Dipak Misra had stated.

“We are of the view that the appellant was arrested and he has suffered custody for almost 50 days. His arrest has been seriously criticised in the closure report of the CBI. From the aforesaid report, the harassment and mental torture faced by the appellant is obvious,” the bench had added.

The judgement had stated the “entire prosecution” initiated by the State police was “malicious and it has caused tremendous harassment and immeasurable anguish” to Narayanan. “It can be stated with certitude” that the basic proper of life and private liberty of Mr. Narayanan was “gravely affected”.

The CBI, whereas giving a clear chit to the scientist, had stated that Siby Mathews had left “the entire investigation to IB surrendering his duties” and ordered indiscriminate arrest of the scientist and others with out satisfactory proof.

The case had caught consideration in October 1994, when Maldivian nationwide Rasheeda was arrested in Thiruvananthapuram for allegedly acquiring secret drawings of ISRO rocket engines to promote to Pakistan.

Mr. Narayanan, the then director of the cryogenic venture at ISRO, was arrested together with the then ISRO Deputy Director D. Sasikumaran, and Fousiya Hasan, a Maldivian buddy of Rasheeda.

The apex courtroom had termed the police motion towards the ex-scientist of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) a “psycho-pathological treatment”.

It had stated that his “liberty and dignity”, primary to his human rights, had been jeopardised as he was taken into custody and, ultimately, regardless of all of the glory of the previous, was compelled to face “cynical abhorrence”.

Awarding a compensation ₹50 lakh, which was to be paid by the State authorities, the highest courtroom had stated it was being given to compensate for his struggling, anxiousness and the therapy meted out to him.

The apex courtroom had stated the “reputation of an individual is an insegregable facet of his right to life with dignity” and had rejected the plea of the Kerala authorities that due to the lapse of time, no inquiry or subsequent actions had been wanted to be taken towards the erring officers.

It had accepted Mr. Narayanan’s plea that the authorities, who had been answerable for inflicting such a “harrowing effect” on his thoughts, ought to face “legal consequences”.

The findings of the report aren’t but identified.