The Alappuzha District and Sessions Court on Saturday will consider the anticipatory bail plea of five accused — Anilkumar, the former gunman of then Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, and members of his escort team, S Sandeep, Shaiju V K, Arun R, and Vipin V V — in the Nava Kerala Sadas assault case.

The case pertains to the alleged assault on KSU and Youth Congress activists who staged a protest during the Nava Kerala Sadas outreach programme in Alappuzha on December 15, 2023.

In their bail plea, Anilkumar and Sandeep argued that the protesters had approached dangerously close to the convoy, which was moving under Z-plus security cover, and that their actions were necessary to prevent a perceived threat to the CM, accompanying ministers, and security personnel. Officers also said they feared arrest due to political rivalry involving the ruling front, describing the prosecution’s case as fabricated. They also emphasised that neither of them had any prior criminal record.

The accused approached the Sessions Court after additional charges, including culpable homicide under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code, were recently incorporated into the case following the constitution of the SIT by the newly elected UDF government. They had initially sought bail before a magistrate court but withdrew their applications and moved the Sessions Court after the inclusion of the non-bailable offence.

However, the Special Investigation Team (SIT) countered that the officers, whose primary duty is to provide close protection to the CM, allegedly got out of their escort vehicle and assaulted activists Ajay Jewel Kuriakose and A D Thomas, now Alappuzha MLA, even though the protesters were already under police control and the CM's vehicle had safely moved ahead.

The SIT said the alleged assault lasted about 11 seconds and violated established security protocols, including the “Yellow Book” guidelines and Police Headquarters Advisory No. 27/21, which instruct PSG personnel to engage only to protect the protectee and avoid unnecessary confrontation. Investigators recorded statements from eyewitnesses, police personnel, and the bus driver, and examined visual evidence showing that the protesters were unarmed and posed no immediate threat.

The SIT further noted that the officers’ actions caused a serious security lapse by stopping their vehicle on a public road, obstructing the convoy, and using lathis in an unnecessary assault. Based on these findings, a report was submitted to the court, naming all five individuals who have been suspended by the State Police Chief. The investigation is ongoing, including scrutiny of earlier records that may have been altered to protect the accused.

The case has undergone multiple stages of investigation. Following the registration of a case at the Alappuzha South police station under Sections 294(b), 324 and 325 of the IPC, the District Crime Branch conducted an inquiry and submitted a report. The report concluded that the accused, as police personnel providing security to a protected individual, had acted in the discharge of their official duties and were protected under Section 113 of the Kerala Police Act.

However, the de facto complainants, AD Thomas and Ajay Jewel Kuriakose, challenged the report by filing a protest complaint. The court subsequently ordered further investigation, enabling the complainants to produce CCTV footage and other materials to determine whether the alleged acts were committed in the course of official duty.