Who is Ravada A Chandrasekhar? New Kerala DGP was once blamed for 1994 firing at CPM workers

Ravada A Chandrasekhar, a 1991-batch IPS officer, on Tuesday took charge as the new Kerala DGP.

The Kerala government on Monday announced the appointment of 1991-batch IPS officer Ravada A Chandrasekhar as the new Director General of Police and state police chief. Chandrasekhar is currently on central deputation and serves as Special Director in the Intelligence Bureau.

He succeeds Shaik Darvesh Saheb, who retired on Monday, on the post. Chandrasekhar, who took charge on Tuesday, was picked from the list of three senior police officers empanelled by the UPSC as the next DGP during a special Cabinet meeting chaired by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.

Law and Order ADGP H Venkatesh, IPS, would hold the additional charge of the post of the DGP, till Chandrasekhar assumes charge, the order issued by the government in this regard said.

Who is Ravada A Chandrasekhar?

A native of Andhra Pradesh, Chandrasekhar has had a long tenure on central deputation in various roles. Expressing happiness over the development, Chandrasekhar told a news channel that he was hopeful of benefitting from his earlier stint in the state. Chandrasekhar has one year left in service as the state police chief, but his term will get extended to two years as per a Supreme court directive.

"As you all know, Kerala Police is a very professional police force which has been doing a wonderful job. My predecessors and colleagues have done a great job here, and I will continue this trend. The main key areas of focus will be the anti-drug drive...," Chandrasekhar said after taking charge.

The appointment of Chandrasekhar, however, has also brought back the memories of the Koothuparamba firing incident in 1994 which left five workers of CPI(M)’s youth wing Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) dead and another worker bed-ridden. The injured worker passed away in 2024.

The 1994 Koothuparamba firing incident

The firing incident in Koothuparamba took place during a protest organised by the DYFI against the then Cooperation Minister MV Raghavan, who was earlier with the CPI(M), opposing the Congress-led government's self-financing educational institutions.

Chandrasekhar, then the Assistant Superintendent of Police at Thalassery in Kannur district, was one of the police officers deputed on the spot for crowd control.

With the issue resurfacing following the government's decision to appoint Chandrasekhar as the DGP, CPI(M) state secretary MV Govindan pointed out that the officer was not convicted by the court in the case.

"The party has no role in the decision, which is taken by the government. We will stand by the government's decision. No party leader has protested against the decision," he said.

Speaking on the alleged police brutality towards CPI(M) cadre in 1994 in detail with the media, senior CPI(M) leader P Jayarajan said that Chandrasekhar's appointment should not be an issue where the party should adopt a political stand.

“We had staged protests against all officers involved in the incident. But his appointment is not a matter in which the party should adopt a political stand. It is not a political decision but an administrative one,” the CPIM leader from Kannur said.

After the Left government came to power in the state in 1996, a judicial probe was ordered in the matter. The Commission, in its findings, found three officials responsible for the police firing. Chandrasekhar wasn't one of them.

Things took a turn against him when police initiated a probe into the 1994 incident based on the findings of the judicial commission and listed Chandrasekhar as one of the accused. He challenged the proceedings in the High Court which quashed the FIR against him in 2000. The state government challenged the high court's order in Supreme Court but failed to get a favourable outcome.

“The officer hails from Andhra Pradesh and had joined the service only two days prior to the occurrence, thus he had no acquaintance with anybody. In obedience to the order of the superior authorities he had gone to the spot, therefore, the allegation that he connived with anybody or shared the common intention to commit murder is only a figment of imagination,” the High Court had said in its order.