Are There Lapses in the Sabarimala Gold Case Due to Pressure from CM Vijayan's Office?
Synopsis
Key Takeaways
- Serious allegations of pressure from the Chief Minister's Office on the SIT.
- Failure to file charge sheets led to statutory bail being granted to accused individuals.
- The investigation's integrity is in question, as key evidence remains unrecovered.
- Continued faith in the SIT as an institution, despite performance issues.
- Concerns over potential evidence tampering if accused are released.
Thiruvananthapuram, Jan 24 (NationPress) The Leader of the Opposition in the Kerala Assembly, V.D. Satheesan, sharply criticized the LDF government led by Pinarayi Vijayan regarding the management of the Sabarimala gold theft case. He claimed that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) showed significant failures due to alleged pressure from the Chief Minister's Office (CMO), which he argued allowed the main accused to obtain statutory bail.
During a press briefing, Satheesan pointed out that the SIT's inability to submit charge sheets within the required 90 days led to the release of individuals implicated in the Sabarimala gold theft.
“Murari Babu received default bail because of this delay, while the primary accused, Unnikrishnan Potti, has also been granted bail in one case and could potentially receive bail in future cases if such lapses persist,” he cautioned.
“The lack of even an interim charge sheet has compromised the prosecution's stance and allowed the accused to secure bail,” Satheesan mentioned, emphasizing that this situation could enable those under investigation to gain bail shortly after their arrests.
He further stated that neither the stolen gold nor the items reported missing have been recovered to date.
Satheesan alleged that the Chief Minister's Office exerted intense pressure on the SIT to delay the filing of charge sheets, a claim he noted had been corroborated by court observations.
Despite expressing continued faith in the SIT as an institution, Satheesan remarked that its performance in this particular case has not met legal expectations.
Referring to previous court rulings, he mentioned that bail had been initially denied due to concerns over potential evidence tampering if the accused were freed.
“It is unacceptable to create a scenario where those who were previously denied bail can now obtain statutory bail,” he concluded, recalling Supreme Court remarks questioning if those accused of stealing Lord Ayyappa's gold were now seeking bail.