Kerala High Court Directs Vigilance Authority to Consider Pending Representation of Petitioner Seeking Compensation.

Headnote:

The Kerala High Court in W.P.(C) No. 10631 of 2025 directed the 2nd respondent, the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB), to consider a representation filed by the petitioner, Sathyan Naravoor K, who was accused in Crime No. 8/2016 of VACB Kozhikode. The petitioner sought compensation of ₹25,00,000 for alleged malicious prosecution. The Court observed that while the claim for compensation was not maintainable at this stage, the pending representation (Ext.P5) could be considered on its merits. The Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction that the 2nd respondent consider Ext.P5 within three months from receipt of the judgment, allowing procedural clarification or notices if necessary.

Background:

The petitioner, Sathyan Naravoor K, accused in Crime No. 8/2016 registered by VACB Kozhikode, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking compensation of ₹25,00,000 on the grounds of malicious prosecution and a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant such compensation. He also sought consideration of his representation (Ext.P5) submitted to the Chief Secretary and other officials for action against the officials responsible for registering the case and for grant of compensation. The State, represented by the Additional Director General of Prosecution, and the VACB were respondents in the petition.

Court Opinion / Judgment:

Justice A. Badharudeen held that the writ petition for grant of compensation was not maintainable, as the case did not qualify for relief under the principles of malicious prosecution. However, acknowledging the pending Ext.P5 representation filed by the petitioner, the Court directed the 2nd respondent (VACB) to consider the representation within three months from receipt of the judgment. The Court clarified that the respondent may issue notices or seek clarification from the petitioner if necessary. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with no other relief granted.

Legal Provisions Concerned:

• Article 226 of the Constitution of India — Writ jurisdiction of High Court.

• Principles of malicious prosecution and compensation claims.

• Authority of administrative respondents to consider representations filed by affected parties.

Case Details:

• Case Name: Sathyan Naravoor K v. State of Kerala & Ors.

• Court: High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam

• Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 10631 of 2025

• Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:75377

• Coram: Justice A. Badharudeen

• Crime No.: 8/2016, VACB Kozhikode

• Outcome: Writ Petition Disposed; Respondent Directed to Consider Pending Representation Within Three Months