The Kerala Government had, by its order on June 27, 1996, withdrawn the consent it had earlier given to the CBI and had asked the state police to probe the case. Quashing this order, a Division Bench comprising Justice M K Mukherjee and Justice Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri said: "(The order) does not comport with the known pattern of a responsible government bound by rule of law. This is undoubtedly a matter of concern and consternation. We say no more." The judges ordered the state government to pay Rs 1 lakh to each of the appellants as costs.

By this, the Supreme Court has allowed the appeals filed by the six petitioners in the case: The two ISRO scientists, S Nambi Narayanan and D Sasikumar; the two Maldivian women, Mariam Rasheeda and FauziaHassan and two businessmen, S K Sharma and K Chandrasekhar.

All six had been discharged in the case after the CBI filed a "closure"report in April 1996, stating that the allegations of espionage were investigated and found to be false.

Two months after their discharge, the state government filed a notification withdrawing the consent given earlier to the CBI and ordered the state police to "further investigate". This order was upheld by the Kerala High Court and it was then that the six filed appeals in the Supreme Court along with the CBI Director and the Union of India.

Stating that the job of an investigating agency is not only to work towards a conviction but to bring out the "real unvarnished truth," the judges said: "Yet, the Kerala Government wants the instant case to be further investigated by a team nominated by it with the avowed object of establishing that the accused are guilty, even after the investigating agency of its choice, the CBI, found that no case had been made out againstthem."

The state government's intentions were clear, the judges said, in the order passed by the Thiruvananthapuram Chief Judicial Magistrate, on December 13, 1996, while granting permission to the Kerala police to further investigate.

In this order, the CJM had recorded the report of the Director General of Police that he had reliable information that the conclusions arrived at by the CBI were not correct and that if further investigated, more evidence could be collected which would point to the guilt of the accused.

"If before taking up further investigation, an opinion had already been formed regarding guilt of accused, and that too at a stage when the commission of offence itself was yet to be proved, it is obvious that the investigation cannot and will not be fair and its outcome appears to be a foregone conclusion," the judges said.

The ISRO spy case broke out in October, 1994 when the state police took into custody Mariyam Rasheeda who had come on a visit to India from Maldives, on theallegation that she had overstayed despite expiry of her visa.

In November the same year, the police registered another case against her and Fouzia Hassan under the Official Secrets Act alleging that in collusion with some Indians and foreigners they had committed acts prejudicial to the safety and sovereignty of India.

During the probe, DIG (crime) C B Mathew sent a report to the state police chief that his team was not equipped to conduct effective investigations and that the case be handed over to the CBI.

Acting on the police chief's recommendation, the government issued a notification giving consent to the CBI to pursue investigations and consequently the agency filed a chargesheet in December, 1994 which culminated in an order of acquittal in favour of Rasheeda and discharge of all other accused.

However, in June 1996, the Nayanar government issued a notification withdrawing its consent to the CBI saying that in the public interest. The case be "reinvestigated" by a special team of state policeofficers.

This notification was amended in July the same year saying that instead of the words "reinvestigation" the words "further investigation" be added.

The judges said: "If the formidable impediments stood in the way of the state government to get the case properly investigated by its police and impelled it to hand over the investigation to the CBI, it is hardly conceivable that the State Government would be able to pursue the investigations effectively as those impediments would still be there."

Besides, the SC said, the Union Government has all along maintained that it is satisfied with the CBI investigation and has strongly opposed the bid for the Kerala police to commence fresh investigations. "In spite thereof the state government has been pursuing the matter zealously and strongly defending their action, knowing fully well that a prosecution can be launched by or at the instance of the Central Government only."