Sharon murder: Kerala police have no authority to investigate, say experts

Kochi: Kerala Police have no authority to probe into the alleged murder of Parassala native Sharon Raj, say legal experts.

With top-level officers in the force also giving a similar opinion, the state police chief has once again sought legal opinion from the advocate general (AG).

PC Ramachandran Nair, the former principal of Kerala Police Training College, said the Criminal Law does not allow the Kerala Police to investigate in a place where it does not have jurisdiction.

Section 178 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) states that an investigation must be conducted at the scene of the crime.

The police found that the crime that led to the murder was committed at the accused Greeshma's house at Ramavarmanchira, which comes under Palugal station of Tamil Nadu police.

Therefore, the exact place (the place of occurrence as per the law) is in Tamil Nadu. He pointed out that the current investigation would only favour the accused in the future.

The police have raised the 'party of same transaction' argument. As per this, they claim that Greeshma had summoned Sharon to kill him. But, even Sharon has not raised such an allegation. Hence this will not stand in court. Moreover, Greeshma did not kill him on previous occasions when she called him home. The defense counsel could argue, the day he was allegedly poisoned, he was invited home as in the past.

"If a gang of people takes a person from Kollam to Thiruvananthapuram in a vehicle. If he is beaten up by them on the way, a case can be registered and investigated at any police station along the way. This is part of the same transaction theory. But that does not apply in Sharon's case," he pointed out.

Another senior police officer said that in a CRPC 498 case where the marriage took place at the man's house, the engagement took place at the bride's house, and the stay took place in the woman's house, it would come under the ambit of part-of-same transaction. Then the crime can be registered under two police stations. "But in Sharon's case, the crime starts when Greeshma calls him to her home. The incident took place at her house. It is not sufficient to say that Sharon was at his house when he received the call to be part of the same transaction theory," the officer said.

"The other claim is that he was made to drink the spiked ayurvedic concoction. This happened in Greeshma's house. Naturally, both of these do not come under the scope of the part-of-same transaction theory," he added.

The FIR can be registered by Parashala police. There are clear judgments of the High Court and the Supreme Court in this regard. But the verdicts state that such FIRs should be handed over to the police station concerned after registration of cognizable offence.

Naturally, the Parashala Police should have registered the FIR and translated it and the case diary into English and handed them over to the Tamil Nadu Police through the SP, experts say.

"The fact that Kerala police doing the work that Tamil Nadu police should have done will be questioned in the court. This will not only weaken the defence's argument but also kill the case itself," Nair said.