According to the lawyer, the petitioner was a leader of the Opposition. He told the court that he had been roaming around the residence ever since, threatening personal freedom. He also said that the police were not giving away the FIRs registered in the cases against the petitioner to select alternative ways legally.
However, the CID lawyer said that they had not registered any case against the petitioner. A lawyer for the Home Ministry said no cases had been registered against Ayyanna in police stations in five districts. They asked for time to submit details of cases in other districts. He said the petition was filed to seek protection from the police investigation in the case of legally registered cases.
The High Court questioned the police as to why they were roaming around the house of the deceased without any case. The government lawyer replied that they would go for other cases. The lawyer recalled that the court had issued interim orders in respect of other FIRs registered against the petitioner. He was also reported to have been arrested on some media channels. The court questioned how the petition could be filed on the basis of those articles.
Considering the arguments of both the parties, the police were informed that the petitioner was not allowed to interfere in his personal liberty contrary to the provisions of the law. He said that he could not interfere in his personal freedom illegally. If a case is registered against him, he should proceed according to the rules of law. It also directed the Home Ministry to keep before the court the details of cases registered against Ayyanna at various police stations across the state. It then adjourned the hearing to Friday to give appropriate orders.