Kerala Court grants bail to PP Divya accused of abetting suicide of ADM Naveen Babu

In a significant development, the Thalassery Sessions Court in Kerala granted regular bail on Friday to former Kannur District Panchayat President, PP Divya, in a case involving the alleged abetment of suicide of Additional District Magistrate (ADM) Naveen Babu (*PP Divya v. The Station House Officer, Thalassery*). The court decides to approve her bail as the legal community awaits the detailed judgment.
ADM Naveen Babu was found dead at his residence following a farewell ceremony held before his transfer to another district. During the event, Divya allegedly made public comments implying that Babu was involved in bribery over a no-objection certificate (NOC) for a petrol pump. These comments, reportedly aimed at questioning Babu’s integrity, have since been cited as a potential factor leading to his tragic death.
Following Babu’s death, Divya initially sought anticipatory bail from the Thalassery Sessions Court. In her application, she argued that her remarks were not intended to target or harm Babu personally but were part of a broader effort to highlight administrative transparency and accountability. She maintained that her statements were made in good faith to address perceived corruption, not to place pressure on Babu. Despite this defense, the court denied her request for anticipatory bail on October 29.
After the denial, Divya was taken into custody and remanded for 14 days. She then moved for regular bail, which the Thalassery Sessions Court accepted on Friday, allowing her release from judicial custody.
The case has attracted notable legal representation. Advocate K. Viswan appeared for Divya in the trial court. At the same time, Advocates John S. Ralph and PM Sajitha represented the interests of ADM Naveen Babu’s family, who are closely monitoring the proceedings. Public Prosecutor K. Ajith Kumar represented the state, arguing on behalf of the prosecution.
This case continues to generate significant public and legal interest, especially as the court’s forthcoming detailed judgment may clarify critical points, including the role of public officials’ statements in potentially influencing tragic outcomes.