The vigilance team abducted PS Sarith, the first accused in the gold smuggling case, from the flat of Swapna Suresh in Palakkad. After Sapna alleged that Sarith had been abducted, it was explained that he had been taken into vigilance custody. He also said that he was taken for questioning in the Life Mission flat case.
But Sarith said he was only asked whose motive was behind the revelation of the dream. After being brought to the Palakkad office, a notice was issued asking him to appear in Thiruvananthapuram on the 16th in the flat case. It was there for about three hours. Sarith, who complained that his hand was swollen after being dragged into the vehicle, sought treatment at the district hospital.
The vigilance action was taken without even informing the local police. Swapna alleged that Sarith was taken away without giving notice and without showing his identity card. ‘The Chief Minister in charge of the Home Department will not be kidnapped without his knowledge. Will Shivshankar, the fifth accused in the Life Mission case, be taken away like this? ‘They asked.
He said he had his child and helper in the flat and that those who came said they were police. The Palakkad Town DySP and the South Police then went to the flat and checked the CCTV and asked the security personnel for information. It was explained that Sarith was taken away by the central agency and vigilance. After confirming that it was vigilance, the police returned.
Prior to the incident, he had met dream journalists at the office premises of The High Range Rural Development Society (HRDS) in Chandranagar, Palakkad, where he now works. He also claimed that there was no conspiracy in talking about the role of the Chief Minister. ‘Mr. Pinarayi Vijayan, Mrs. Kamala, Mrs. Veena, Mr. Raveendran, Sivashankar and Mrs. Nalini Neto said what they did. All the participants and their families lost their lives while living a life of luxury, ”she said.
Vigilance to buy in mobile custody
Palakkad ∙ Sarith was taken away by a four-member team led by the CI of the Vigilance Palakkad unit. The action was taken on the instructions of the Vigilance Directorate. Vigilance officials said the only aim was to take the mobile phone into custody.
Sarith is the seventh accused in the Life Mission flat case. He was taken to the office, where he was released after completing phone custody procedures. As the Palakkad unit was not involved in the case, no interrogation was conducted. The mobile phone was taken to the Directorate of Vigilance.
Sarit was ‘kidnapped’ by vigilance, much to the embarrassment of the local police. Police had been searching for Sarith for more than an hour. It is learned that only the top brass of the district police was informed about the detention.
Illegal action by vigilance
Thiruvananthapuram: Although the vigilance has the power to take the accused into custody, it is illegal to take Sarith away without giving notice and seize his mobile phone. The vigilance probe into the Life Mission case, which is said to be the cause, has been stalled for six months. Even in the case where the actress was tortured, the mobile phones of the accused were taken into custody by the court.
Capture is illegal: T. Asafali
Kochi: Former Director General of Prosecutions T. Krishnan said that it was wrong for Vigilance to take Sarith away from Palakkad without giving notice. Asafali. The police officer is obliged to give notice under Criminal Procedure Code 160 if the witness is to be questioned.
Asafali said the police could not take action on KT Jaleel’s complaint that the revelation of the dream was defamatory. The police do not have the power to register a defamation case. He said the complaint should be filed in the Magistrate’s Court
Attempt for planned riot: Jalil
Thiruvananthapuram: KT Jaleel has lodged a complaint at the Cantonment station alleging that Suresh’s allegations were part of a political conspiracy involving PC George and that he was using the dream to spread lies in the media and then attempt planned riots in various parts of the state. He has been accused of misleading UDF and BJP youths, taking them to the streets, attacking the police and causing clashes.
An investigation team led by a senior police officer will be appointed to look into the complaint. The case was reported to the media through an official press release from the police headquarters. It is not uncommon for a complaint lodged at a local station to be reported to the police headquarters.
Disagreement on confidentiality
Kochi: Legal experts have two opinions on the legitimacy of the confidential statement given by Swapna Suresh to the magistrate on his own. According to one source, the application for recording of the statement of the accused should be made by the investigating officers and the confidential statement under section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code is part of the process of turning the accused into an apologist in the case. But BN Sivashankar, Swapna’s lawyer, argued that the accused, like the witness and the victim, has a constitutional right to testify on his own behalf. The District Principal Sessions Court, which deals with money laundering cases, allowed a confidential statement to be made before a magistrate.
Defendant’s counsel also explained that the defendant has the right to make a disclosure before the court that would lead to further investigation at any stage in the case where the trial has not been completed.
English Summary: Swapna Suresh against vigilance action against sarith