Read Time: 07 minutes

The State government of Kerala submitted to the High Court of Kerala that they cannot compensate for the incident in which an eight-year-old girl was humiliated by the pink police in the mid of the road, in the presence of her father.

The Court was hearing a petition filed by the minor girl along with her father. According to the recording played in CD, on August 27, Thonaikal resident Jayachandran, a rubber tapping worker, and his daughter had gone out to see a vehicle of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), passing through the road.

A civil police officer, Rajitha, was present in the vicinity with the pink police vehicle parked there. She accosted the father and child and started questioning them, downright accusing them of stealing her phone. The CPO raised her voice at the child too, demanding her phone. Later, when someone dialled her number, her phone was found inside her bag.

The officer left the scene without an apology. An onlooker shot a video of the incident that went viral. The visuals were examined in the open court.

On November 18, the family moved the High Court, seeking compensation. They demanded strict action against the official. The petition claimed that the incident had caused the child serious distress. The family alleged that the police and the government were trying to protect the guilty and sought compensation of Rs 50 lakh.

On Monday, Additional Public Prosecutor P. Narayanan representing the government said that there were faults on the part of the officer and that necessary steps to mitigate were taken already. The Government also said further actions cannot be taken against the police officer. Further, the Government submitted that there is no visual record of the incident hence no evidence.

The submission came as a surprise since the petitioner has already presented a CD containing a recording of the incident. Justice Devan Ramachandran, presiding over the matter stated:

“Since the State now says that the Court cannot take cognisance of the event in the absence of the video, the video referred to by the IGP in her affidavit must be placed before the Court to deliver judgment in the matter after watching the same."

The government also claimed that there was no violation of the girl’s fundamental rights and it cannot compensate. To this the Court stated:

“They (State) are saying there is no violation of fundamental rights probably because they don't recognise certain fundamental rights. Some people are less than others, other people are more than others, maybe that's how it is."

Justice Ramachandran also pointed out that the woman officer had also admitted that the child had started crying even before a crowd gathered, but the affidavit filed by an Inspector General of Police (IGP) contended that the girl cried only after hearing the ridicule by the people there.

"You (state) are arguing all this after respondent 4 (pink police officer) conceded to everything," the court said.

"A different colour is being given that nothing was on record to show that such an incident occurred. I took some things for granted. I thought you (state) were in agreement. That is the mistake I made," the judge said.

The matter is listed for day after tomorrow by which time the State is to submit video evidence.

Name Withheld (minor) v. State of Kerala