The Hindu : Tamil Nadu News : Ravi Subramaniam's deposition recorded

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Apr 08, 2005

Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu

Ravi Subramaniam's deposition recorded

By Our Staff Reporter

KANCHEEPURAM, APRIL 7. The Kancheepuram Judicial Magistrate-I, G. Uthamaraj, today recorded a deposition from the accused-turned-approver, Ravi Subramaniam, before committing the Sankararaman murder case to the District Sessions Court.

Though the Special Public Prosecutor, Balasundaram, "examined" Mr. Ravi Subramaniam immediately after his deposition, the defence counsel sought time to peruse the "voluminous" evidence, the documents, before cross-examining him. The Magistrate posted the case for further hearing on April 11.

In his statement, Mr. Ravi Subramaniam said that he had introduced Appu alias Krishnasamy to the Kanchi Sankaracharya, Sri Jayendra Saraswathi, towards the end of 2001 since Appu wanted to meet the Acharya in view of problems faced by him from "political circles." At the meeting, the Acharya told them that he was "blackmailed" by two persons. However, he asked them not to bother about it.

A few days later, the Acharya gave photographs of Radhakrishnan and Sankararaman to him, with their addresses written on the back, and asked him to hand over them to Kathiravan. On September 20, 2002, the Acharya called him up and asked whether money had been paid to Kathiravan, to which he had replied in the negative. One morning, the Acharya called him up and informed that since Radhakrishnan was "assaulted" there would not be any trouble from him (Radhakrishnan), Mr. Ravi Subramaniam said.

In 2004, prior to `Mahamaham' festival, the Acharya called him to Thanjavur and handed over 100 notes of Rs.1000 denomination to be handed over to Kathiravan, he said. On September 1, 2004, he met the Acharya at Kanchi Mutt along with Appu and Kathiravan. At the meeting, Sri Jayendra Saraswathi, in the presence of the Kanchi Mutt manager, Sundaresa Iyer, handed over a letter purportedly written by the slain Sankararaman and asked Appu to "finish Sankararaman" even if an amount of Rs. 50 lakhs was required to carry out the crime. "The senior pontiff asked me and Appu to meet the junior seer also since he was also facing some problem," Mr. Ravi Subramaniam said.

On September 2, 2004, he came to Kancheepuram along with Appu and Kathiravan in a car and identified the house for a person, whom he (Ravi Subramaniam) later came to know as Rajini alias Chinna. Subsequently, on the same day, Ravi Subramaniam and Kathiravan met the Kanchi Acharya who handed them over Rs.10 lakhs in cash and asked them to obtain the signature of Appu in a voucher.

"I handed over the money to Appu on September 3 evening at around 5-30 p.m. at the Chola Hotel and obtained his signature on the voucher. During this meeting, Kathiravan rushed in and signalled that Sankararaman was murdered," he added. He had also narrated how he had been used by the Kanchi Acharya to pass the money to Appu on different occasions.

Mr. Ravi Subramaniam claimed that he was threatened by the Acharya not to reveal anything to anyone, when he (Ravi Subramaniam) pointed out a statement given by the Kanchi seer in a press interview that "some of his devotees might have committed the murder."

Subsequently, Kathiravan demanded some Rs.20 lakhs from Kanchi Acharya through him to produce five false accused in George Town court. "The money was passed through me for which I had obtained the signature of Kathiravan in a voucher," Mr. Ravi Subramaniam said. Earlier, the Magistrate, G. Uthamaraj, heard an argument from Mr. Dinakaran, who had moved a petition seeking to cross-examine the accused-turned-approver before committal of the case to District Sessions Court. He claimed that defence should not be put into a disadvantageous position at the time of trial by pointing out a Supreme Court judgment in a case between Parliament and Sanjay Gandhi. The Special Public Prosecutor, Balasundaram, opposed the petition citing the Supreme Court judgement and concluded his argument by stating that it was left to the discretion of the court decide on this matter. After going through the Supreme Court and other High Court order copies filed by the counsels, the Magistrate, G.Uthamaraj gave a ruling in favour of the defence.

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

Tamil Nadu