![]() Monday, Feb 14, 2005 |
| Front Page | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Front Page
By V. Venkatasubramanian
KANCHEEPURAM, FEB. 13. The accused-turned-approver in the Sankararaman murder case, Ravi Subramaniam, has sought action against two lawyers, one of them a defence counsel in the case. In a petition to the Kancheepuram Judicial Magistrate-I, G.Uthamaraj, Ravi Subramaniam said Nadira Banu and Revathi told him on February 1 that they represented their senior lawyers Y.Thiyagarajan and A.Shanmugham (appearing for the arrested from the Kanchi Mutt in the murder case) and offered him a `huge amount' to turn against the police and asked him not to reveal anything against the Acharya, Sri Jayendra Saraswathi. As he did not respond positively, they came to the sub-jail at Kancheepuram on February 3, but he was not available, as he had to appear before the Saidapet and Kancheepuram courts that day. When Ravi Subramaniam turned down their request, the lawyers threatened that he would be killed when he comes out of jail, according to a senior police official of the Special Investigation Team, which probed the case. Ravi Subramaniam urged the court that action be initiated against the lawyers and sought protection for his life. The petition was forwarded to the court by the sub-jail authority. The advocates gained entry into the sub-jail using the position of Ms.Nadira Banu, a member of Free Legal Aid Society, to threaten Ravi Subramaniam. The police would register a case against them once they received a court directive, the official said when asked whether it would be possible to initiate legal action against a person who is counsel on record for the accused. Defence's response Responding to the allegation, Mr. Shanmugham said it would be impossible for anyone to meet a prisoner in jail without obtaining permission from the jail authorities. Moreover, meetings were held only in the visitor's room under the watchful eyes of prison personnel. Further, his junior, Ms.Revathi, was counsel on record for some of the persons arrested in the case.
`Needless importance'
He wondered why importance was being given to Ravi Subramaniam's complaint (though the judiciary and police had to protect him from `external' influences as he had turned approver) when several complaints of abuse of power by the SIT while transporting the accused, especially `Mattu' Basker, from the Chennai Central Prison to Kancheepuram and back, failed to evoke response. Basker filed a memo through his counsel that he was taken to the office of a senior police official here, instead of Chennai, on November 19 after the magistrate court denied him police custody, Mr.Shanmugham said.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |
Copyright © 2005, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|