The Kerala High Court has ordered a further CBI probe into Balabhaskar death, holding that the agency’s earlier further investigation was casual and lackadaisical.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Friday (October 9) ordered further investigation into the death of violinist Balabhaskar in a 2018 car accident, setting aside a Magistrate’s order that had declined it and directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to entrust the probe to an officer of proven integrity, not below the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police [K.C. Unni and Another v. State of Kerala and Others].
Justice G. Girish allowed the criminal revision petition (Crl.R.P. No. 214 of 2026) filed by the musician’s parents, K.C. Unni and B. Santhakumari, against the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram, dated December 23, 2025. The Court has not recorded any finding on the cause of death, and nothing in the order is a view on the merits of the allegations raised by the family.
The case
Balabhaskar and his family met with a car accident on September 25, 2018, while returning from a temple in Thrissur. The couple’s young daughter died on the spot, and Balabhaskar died of his injuries a week later. The State police registered a case against the driver for rash and negligent driving. The Crime Branch later concluded that the incident was purely an accident, and the probe was handed to the CBI on July 27, 2020. The CBI also concluded it was an accident, and the Magistrate rejected the family’s request for further investigation.
A co-ordinate Bench of the High Court, by order dated October 5, 2023, noted 20 suspicious circumstances and directed further investigation to verify them and to examine whether there was any conspiracy behind the accident. The CBI then deputed an Inspector, lower in rank than the earlier investigating officer, who reiterated the earlier conclusions. The family again sought further investigation before the Magistrate, which was declined by the order of December 23, 2025.
What the Court said
The Court noted that the CBI, which was expected to give serious attention to the 20 suspicious circumstances, instead deputed a lower-ranking officer. Justice Girish observed:
“It is quite unfortunate to note that the Central Bureau of Investigation which was expected to ponder its serious attention to the aforesaid 20 suspicious circumstances, took the matter in a casual and lackadaisical manner, and deputed an Inspector, lower in rank to the earlier Investigating Officer, to conduct the further investigation.”
The Court said the earlier observation that the CBI had accepted statements of witnesses, against whom suspicion was raised, without confronting them with the material collected, was ignored. It held that the Inspector obtained further statements by which witnesses either denied or reconciled their earlier statements, and accepted them as gospel truth. The Court also held that the subsequent investigation was against the purport and objectives of Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the precedents of the Supreme Court and High Courts.
ALSO READ: Allahabad High Court Hands Missing Woman Probe to CBI After UP Police Fail to Trace Her
The directions
The Court set aside the Magistrate’s order dated December 23, 2025, in Crl.M.P. No. 2307/2025, and directed the CBI to pass the necessary orders within two weeks of receiving the order, entrusting the further investigation to an officer of proven integrity, not below the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police. The officer must conduct the investigation taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances, paying serious attention to the aspects pointed out in the earlier order of the High Court.
Why the order matters
The order shows that when a constitutional court directs further investigation on specific suspicious circumstances, the agency is expected to carry it out with the seriousness and seniority the direction requires, and that a Magistrate cannot treat a reconciling second round as the end of the matter. Here the Court tied the quality of the probe to the rank of the officer, and ordered it to be led by a more senior officer.
The order directs only a fresh round of investigation. It does not decide whether the 2018 incident was an accident, and the CBI’s earlier conclusions have been set aside only to the extent needed for that further inquiry.
Case Title: K.C. Unni and Another v. State of Kerala and Others [Crl.R.P. No. 214 of 2026]
Bench: Justice G. Girish, Kerala High Court
Date of Order: October 9, 2026
Appearances: Advocates T.M. Raman Kartha, Manju R. Kartha, Sneha Brigit Prince, Greeshma T.G., Gowri Gopinath and Abin K. Sebastian for the petitioners; Senior Advocate K.P. Satheesan, Special Public Prosecutor, and Public Prosecutor Sameer S. for the respondents