kanchi-sathya.org - information on the kanchi seer, latest news on the the seer trial, facts about the kanchi mutt

Newindpress.com

Copies of chargesheet not served to seers, case adjourned to March 10
Thursday February 24 2005 15:09 IST
PTI

KANCHEEPURAM: For the second time, copies of the chargesheet in the Sankararaman murder case were not given to all the 24 accused, including the Kanchi seers, when they appeared in the court of first class judicial magistrate G Uthamaraj here, on Thursday.

The copies were not given as it was not "fully ready", court sources said.

Earlier, the remand in respect of 20 accused in the case was extended till March 10 and all the accused have been asked to be present in the court on that day, when the chargesheet copies were likely to be given. On February 10 also, despite all the accused being present, the chargesheet copies were not given to them as it was not "fully ready."

When the accused were present before the magistrate, the public prosecutor S Balasundaram submitted that five weeks had already elapsed since the chargesheet was filed. Before the case was committed to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, at the sessions court, it was necessary to examine the accused-turned-approver Ravi Subramaniam.

The prosecutor submitted that the examination of the approver could be done before chargesheet copies were handed over to the accused. When the approver was being examined, the accused need not be present, he contended.

The magistrate told the prosecutor to submit a memo in this regard. The counsel for one of the accused Darwin Wisdom told the court that it was the fundamental and constitutional right of the accused to be present but the prosecutor cited several Supreme Court rulings stating that the approver should be examined in camera. However, he would not press this point.

Senior mutt counsel K S Dinakaran also sought a copy of the memo submitted by the prosecution.

Accused-turned-approver in the murder case, Ravi Subramaniam, who was present, sought police protection and wanted to know the fate of his petition in this regard, but the magistrate told him that police had registered a case which was in progress.

Ravi Subramaniam had recently complained to the judicial magistrate alleging that he was "induced" and "threatened to turn hostile" by advocates Nadira Banu and Revathi Vasudevan.

Earlier, Kanchi seer Jayendra Saraswathi arrived by a van from Kalavai in Vellore district, where he has been staying since his release from Vellore prison on January 11 after being granted bail in the murder case by the Supreme Court the previous day.

The junior seer, Vijayendra Saraswathi arrived in the court from Chennai where he is staying in a house after his release on bail by Madras High Court on February 10.

Appu, a key accused in the case, and other accused were brought from prison in Cuddalore and Chennai.

There was a commotion in the court complex, when there was an altercation between some devotees and a lawyer, who called Jayendra as an accused. In the melee, one of the devotees was roughed up. However, Jayendra, to avoid any unpleasantness, went to his van and sat there till he was asked to be present in the court hall.

Vijayendra, on his arrival in the court complex, got into the van to pay his respect to the senior seer. He carried some fruits also.

In another incident, some advocates who saw A Shanmugham, another mutt advocate, in the court complex argued with him, saying that it was on his behest that they had boycotted court.

Subramaniam's wife in her February 19 complaint to the Kancheepuram police, had alleged that two women lawyers Nadira Banu and Revathi Vasudevan had met her husband at the sub-jail here and "induced" and "threatened" him with dire consequences if he did not withdraw his statement made to the police against Kanchi seer Jayendra Saraswathi.

Following this, the Kancheepuram bar council had decided to boycott courts. Shanmugham told the advocates that he had come merely to assist the senior counsel K S Dinakaran.

Later, at a general body meeting of the bar council under M Madanagopal, advocates demanded an explanation from Shanmugam.

In the court hall the investigating officer K Shaktivel wanted both the seers and mutt manager Sundaresa Iyer to stand inside the box and Jayendra, who initially shook his head, later stood in the box.

Meanwhile, a Chengalpattu court adjourned to March 1 hearing on the anticipatory bail petition of three mutt advocates Revathi, senior counsel Y Thyagarajan and Shanmugham, in connection with the complaint filed by Subramaniam's wife.

>>


	\| How Can I Help ? \| Site Search \| Photo Gallery \| Contact \|