The Home Department has rejected the review petition filed by a woman cop who faced disciplinary action for handcuffing the accused in a financial fraud case and parading them in public. The department had initiated action against Rajani Balakrishnan who was working as Grade ASI at Nedumkandam police station after she handcuffed the accused in a financial fraud case and paraded them in public.

This act was perceived as illegal and inhumane, and the government entrusted Munnar DSP with a probe, citing that her act accounted for a breach of discipline and a lapse in the discharge of official duty. The probe report filed in 2022 confirmed the findings, and her annual increment was cut for two years with a cumulative effect.

Rajani then filed an appeal in which she cited that the accused were being transported from Kottayam sub-jail to Thodupuzha court, and when they reached Pala town, the accused asked the cop what would she do if they escaped. According to her, the accused threatened Rajani and other cops and she handcuffed them under the conviction that they would escape.

The government cited the order of the Supreme Court which said that the handcuffs must be the last refuge, not the routine regimen. "Securing the prisoner is a necessity of judicial trial, and the state must take steps on this behalf. But even here, the policeman's easy assumption or scary apprehension or subjective satisfaction of likely escape if fetters are not fitted on the prisoner is not enough. The heavy deprivation of personal liberty must be justifiable as reasonable restriction in the circumstances. If a few more guards will suffice, then no handcuffs. If a close watch by armed policemen will do, then no handcuffs. If alternative measures may be provided, then no iron bondage. This is the legal norm," according to the SC order.

While considering Rajani's appeal, the government noted that although the accused, who were women, asked the cops what they would do if they ran away, they did not resort to violence or force or make an attempt to escape. There was no such circumstance which warranted the wearing of handcuffs. If at all they tried to escape, three cops on escort duty who were trained were on duty. All these facts point out that there was a lapse on the part of the woman cop.

The accused gave statements that being paraded in public wearing handcuffs caused them mental agony and shame. Considering these statements and findings, the government rejected the review petition and upheld disciplinary action against Rajani.