The Hindu : Front Page : Jayalalithaa's statement on Sankararaman case

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Jan 17, 2005

Front Page

Front Page

Jayalalithaa's statement on Sankararaman case

After being administered the oath of office by the Governor of the State under Article 164 of the Constitution of India, the Chief Minister and his/her Cabinet Members assume office for the administration of the State as envisaged under Article 163. Though the administration of a State Government has many facets, there can be no second opinion that Law and Order, Public Order and the maintenance of peace and tranquillity in the State stand foremost.When a Chief Minister takes the oath of office, he/she commences his/her work relating to his/her office after signing the Forms V and VI prescribed under Schedule-III to the Constitution of India, which respectively contain the Oath of Office and the Oath of Secrecy. It is important to observe that in the oath of office are enshrined the words, "----that I will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India, that I will faithfully and conscientiously discharge my duties as a Minister for the State of ... ... ... ... and that I will do right to all manner of people in accordance with the Constitution and the law without fear or favour, affection or ill-will."

As the Chief Minister of this State, I also hold the Home Portfolio and I administer the Police Department. As a public servant, it is my Constitutional duty to serve the people without fear or favour. It is widely acknowledged that Tamil Nadu stands first in the country in the maintenance of law and order with a proud record of achievements like eliminating the Veerappan menace, rooting out the extremist activities in the State, etc.

In these circumstances, on receiving information about the brutal murder of the orthodox and conservative devotee by name Sankararaman, the Manager of Kancheepuram Varadharajaperumal Temple, in broad daylight, in the office located in the very precincts of the temple by unidentified persons, Police investigation was taken up. This incident has sent shock waves amongst the people, raising the naturally inevitable question in everyone's mind as to why a temple Manager should be brutally murdered, in the very temple premises, by unidentified persons?Prior to this incident, sometime ago, Radhakrishnan, a resident of Mandaveli in Chennai, was brutally attacked with dangerous weapons in the presence of his wife and servant by unidentified persons.In a similar manner, Madhavan of Thirukoshtiyur was brutally assaulted by an unidentified gang on a road in Chennai.These assaults by unidentified persons, and the manner of this murder posed a severe challenge to the Police Department. As the investigations were being carried on painstakingly and assiduously, answers to several intriguing questions unfolded gradually, revealing certain shocking facts. It pointed to the involvement of certain personages who could never have been suspected of involvement in such crimes. When these names were brought to my knowledge, it came as a rude shock to me. The primary duty and responsibility of the investigation of a crime is cast solely on the Investigating Officer of the Police Department. As Chief Minister of the State and as the Minister in-charge of the Home Portfolio including the Police Department, the facts of such cases are brought to my notice only to a minimum extent and that too only in the context and for the purpose of maintenance of law and order and public order. Beyond this there is nothing more. The details of the investigation were not revealed to me, nor was I interested in knowing about these. It was therefore only in the context of taking precautionary steps for the maintenance of law and order and public order that the names of certain persons were brought to my notice.

In this entire episode, I have acted without fear or favour, strictly within the constitutional mandate enshrined in the Oath of Office. Entrusted with the responsibility of carrying out the investigation, the Police Officers have faithfully discharged their duty. In these three cases, two of the victims escaped death by sheer luck, while Sankararaman was brutally murdered. These three cases point to the fact that the three persons who were victims of the assaults had at some point of time connections with the Kanchi Sankara Mutt. This will raise the relevant question in anyone's mind as to why all these three persons, connected with the Kanchi Mutt at some point of time should have been assaulted or murdered?

With the progress of the investigation by the Police, a situation arose wherein the arrest of Sri Jayendra Saraswathi Swamigal, the head of the Kanchi Mutt became inevitable. That law must take its own course requires no specific directions or orders. Hence I was informed only on the point of the need to take steps for maintaining law and order and public order after such an arrest. While the action taken by the Police and the stand of the Government were widely welcomed by the public, there have also been some unfair and unwarranted comments by certain persons and by a certain section of the Media. What these persons and these newspapers and TV Channels would have said and written in the event of the law not taking its course in any other murder case, is anybody's guess.

This is no ordinary incident. It is a murder, a brutal murder of an orthodox temple Manager, committed by hirelings, in broad daylight within the temple premises. Should this brutal crime be left uninvestigated? Is it their view that the hired assassins and conspirators should be allowed to go soot-free? Should those involved in the perpetration of this murder be shown mercy and allowed to go without any action taken against them under the law? The words "without fear or favour" in the oath of office constitutionally mandated to a Chief Minister can admit of no other course of action than to let the law take its own course without fear or favour.

What does the law say on crime detection? Let us examine this. The investigation of such a murder, the result of a sinister conspiracy with deliberate intent committed by unidentified hirelings, is not an easy one. The investigation of such a crime is a complex affair and the reconstruction of the crime can be done only inch by inch, after meticulous enquiry with numerous witnesses. Based on the thorough investigation and only on the facts as they emerge, the persons involved in the crime can be arrested one by one as the crime unfolds. The basic principle of any investigation is to gather the facts assiduously, collate them, relate and interconnect the evidence so collected. The arrest of the persons involved is an integral part of the investigation process.

When any person is arrested, an application for Police custody is made, and with the permission of the Court, custodial interrogation of the person is also sought. The arrested person is then subjected to enquiry for such a period of time as is allowed by the Court. The enquiry is based on the facts gathered by the Police and the documents seized by them, as well as new evidence gathered by them. Based on the enquiry and new information elicited during custodial interrogation, further arrests are necessitated. This is the on-going chain of investigation and it is fundamental to the investigative process. Proving the factual details about the commission of a crime involves the completion of investigation, the laying of a charge-sheet in the Court, transmission of the case from the Committal Court to the Trial Court, supply of copies of the charge-sheet to the accused, and examination of witnesses on oath. There is no stipulation in law specifying any time limit for completing the investigation, though the person arrested on a murder charge has to be released on bail if the charge sheet is not filed within 90 days of his/her arrest.

In the Sankararaman murder case, no arrested person has completed 90 days of detention. It is stated that 26 persons have been so far arrested. The depositions of the various witnesses have been recorded by the Investigating Officer and also by the Court under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Investigation is going on. It is stated that hundreds of documents have been seized. The nature of the documents and their relevance to the case are being studied. All these things have been revealed in the hearings on the bail petitions held so far in the Courts. In the meanwhile, with a view to stalling the investigation, there have been moves by the accused to resort to frequent filing of bail Petitions from forum to forum. For days together, endless arguments are being carried on. Wasteful advertisements are being released. Slanderous news is being published about the Investigating Officers so as to frustrate their efforts and deflect the investigation. Attempts are being made negate confessional statements recorded by the Court. Public meetings are being held so as to misdirect and delay the investigations. False news is being fed to certain newspapers and TV News Channels. Hunger strikes, demonstrations and television debates are being arranged. These tactics are being resorted to as a concerted, orchestrated campaign in support of the accused, at enormous expenditure, to obfuscate the legal proceedings and with a view to somehow weakening the case. The Government is also burdened with this task of overcoming the manoeuvres of these conspiratorial forces to block the truth and ensure that law and justice are upheld despite the creation of insurmountable problems.

No one wished and no one expected that the heads of the Sankara Mutt established to uphold the Hindu Dharma would stray from the path of Dharma and the doctrines of the Shastras to be arraigned as accused in a murder case. At the same time, when all the evidence clearly pointed towards them in the commission of such a crime, that could not be ignored. Guilt or innocence can be established only when the full-fledged trial takes place in the Court and until then, all the previous stages up to the stage of filing of charge-sheet form part of the domain of investigation. At this stage, there can be no room for speculation as to whether this or that fact or document establishes the crime and whether the evidence so gathered is enough to prove the crime. Such an evaluation is possible only when the full-fledged trial itself takes place, which is rightfully the task and duty of the Court. This is the due legal process.

In a case such as this, namely, a conspiracy to have a brutal murder committed by hirelings, a proper investigation can be conducted only when the investigation is not jeopardised till the very end by the onslaught of an alternative trial by a media blitz, and such activities will only impede and obfuscate the ingoing investigation. The people must now become aware of these diversionary and obfuscatory actions of vested interests and political parties that seek to use the columns of certain newspapers and other media aided by half-baked and self proclaimed legal eagles whose lifetime profession is to confuse and divert the truth. These people often give interviews also. In the maintenance of law and order, one cannot discriminate between friend and foe, poor and rich, religious head and atheist. For the State, the maintenance of law and order, peace and tranquillity are supreme and it cannot make distinctions or exceptions for the influential, the high and the mighty. For such persons who are influential, wealthy or religious heads, to believe that they are above law, beyond the ambit of the judicial system and that such persons cannot be called to question for any of their wrongdoings, would be a travesty of the basic tenet of India's Sovereign Constitution that all are equal before the law.

The law requires that it is the duty of all persons, from all walks of life, to aid the State, in the performance of its Sovereign duty in maintaining law and order. The arguments entertained and debated in the Media by some persons that since famous personages are involved in this case and, therefore, there must be preferential, indeed reverential treatment extended to them, that the statements of witnesses connecting them to the case, must prima facie be debunked, cannot be considered to be supportive of the State in the performance of its sovereign functions, or consistent with the duties of all citizens who believe in the rule of law. The appropriate time and place for such arguments are only at the time of trial in the Court of law.

There have been crimes committed by persons and leaders of various faiths and religious denominations in the past, who have been arraigned in Courts of Law. On these occasions, there were no premeditated side-tracking conclusions or tutored or monitored "public views" expressed that such persons were not, or could not, be guilty of the crimes for which they were charged. No section of the Media showed such eagerness and alacrity to support such accused persons in the past. But in the case of the arrest of Sri Jayendra Saraswathi alone, even as the investigation is in progress, and a trial before the Court has not even commenced, various pressure groups and interests have been actively manipulating the media to spread misinformation about the case. It is for the people to consider and assess as to how far such actions can be considered acceptable. The people must consider and conclude for themselves as to what these same interests, forces and newspapers would have spoken and written if the rule of law had not been upheld, and if the law had not been allowed to take its course.

It is the bounden duty of the Police Officers investigating a crime to evaluate every bit of evidence that they collect from every witness that they interrogate, or every document that they seize, for the veracity, credibility and relevance to the case under investigation. It is the duty of the media and other organisations charged with the responsibility of supporting the State Government in maintaining law and order to maintain an unbiased and balanced approach to a case as it progresses. This will ensure that the Police Department's investigation to bring out the truth and allow the law to take its own course is, in no way, prejudiced. On the contrary, we are faced with an extraordinary situation wherein certain sections of the media and interest groups have resorted to playing an entirely opposite and contrary role.

The crime relating to Sankararaman's murder has been reported at the Vishnu Kanchi Police Station and the investigation is being conducted by the appropriate officers. The Police Officers are conducting the criminal Investigation as per the authority vested with them under the Indian criminal procedure Code. When an investigation is taking place, even the judiciary cannot intervene in the mater in the context of several judgements to this effect, the most important judgement being King Emperor Vs. Khawaja Nazir Ahmed as reported in the All India Reporter 1945 Privy Council Page 18. It is their statutory right. That being so, how is it possible legally for me to interfere or intervene in the matter? Also, I have no necessity to do that. When this is the position, adherents of the B.J.P. are asking me to withdraw the above case and also to apologise for whatever had taken place so far and are talking in such a fashion from various platforms. It is painful to note that such requests are being made by persons who had earlier administered the country. When an investigation is in progress in a murder case, how is it possible that the case be withdrawn? It is a fundamental principle of law that an investigation stands apart and is beyond the personal likes and dislikes of a Chief Minister. It is amazing how this elementary principle is not known to those making this demand. Even without knowing this basic principle of investigation in a murder case, they have chosen to drag my name into the investigation process purely out of animosity towards me. They should at least now realise this and desist from such scurrilous attacks. When law empowers the Investigation offices to have the necessary and essential power to investigate, how can a Chief Minister interfere in it one way or the other? The investigation is being carried out by the officers according to a clear plan and with circumspection as they do in all such cases.

The Sankararaman murder case is being investigated in the same manner as other such cases in any police station in Tamil Nadu. When this is the position, I wish to emphasise that the stand of the BJP and certain other vested interests that I can intervene with the investigation process is purely politically motivated and their expectations are contrary to the rule of law.

Adherents of the BJP think that religious leaders are above law and no investigation can be conducted against them. It is for the public to think and judge whether their view is right or not. The BJP may be interested in taking up this issue in their programme to rehabilitate their party. I cannot yield to their request contrary to the law of the land, especially when I have taken an oath under the Constitution which is of a secular nature. Inspite of all these obstacles and hurdles, you have my firm assurance that the Government of Tamil Nadu will maintain law and order in the State in an exemplary manner and uphold the majesty of law without fear or favour.

Sd/-

Jayalalithaa

Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page