BANGALORE: Making her submission before the Fast Track Sessions Court hearing the Pratibha murder case on Thursday, the victim's mother Gouramma said she had suspected the involvement of her son-in-law in the murder. "It was merely a suspicion and nothing more," she said.

Gouramma was replying during cross-questioning by S. Shankarappa, advocate for Shiva Kumar, the accused.

Mr. Shankarappa referred to the statement she had given to a television channel suspecting the involvement of her son-in-law Pavan Shetty in the murder. Ms. Gowramma had made the statement a few days after the recovery of Prathiba's body on December 16, 2005.

Ms. Gowramma said, "It's true that I made that statement. I did not have any definite reason to make it."

She said it was after her daughter's death that she had come to know about a life insurance policy in Pratibha's name worth Rs. 13.5 lakh. It was taken on the advice of Pavan Shetty in October 2005, she said.

Ms. Gowramma said that she had not been in favour of the marriage between Pratibha and Pavan as it was an "inter-caste love marriage." "But it does not mean that I did not love my daughter. I loved her a lot," she said, and broke down.

Ms. Gowramma said that the last time she had met Pratibha was when she had come to her house in J.P. Nagar 2nd Phase on December 12, and was there for about 15 minutes.

"She came to ask me for an extra domestic cylinder as the one in her house was empty. But the cylinder in my house was also empty. Hence she took my card and went to book the cylinder," she said.

Complaint

Pratibha's uncle S. Srinivasa submitted to the court that he had filed a missing complaint with Kumaraswamy Layout Police after he received a call from his sister, Ms. Gowramma, on December 13, 2005.

It was on December 16, 2005, that he came to know about the murder.

He had stayed back with his sister, while his brother Ramu had gone with the police to the spot where Prathiba's body was found, Mr. Srinivasa said.

Earlier in the day, Manoj Kumar, a former employee of Hewlett Packard GlobalSoft, the company with which Pratibha worked, was examined. He submitted that he had travelled in a different cab on December 13 and 14 as the accused Shiva Kumar, who was supposed to pick him, had not turned up.

Judge K. Sukanya on Thursday allowed the application filed by Mr. Shankarappa seeking adjournment of the examination of four expert witnesses, including DNA expert C.V. Gowda and Professor and Head of the Department of Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences K. Anand, who have been partly examined.

Mr. Shankarappa contended that the experts needed to be examined only after examination of the witnesses who had seen the body.

Mr. Shankarappa on Monday asked the judge to conduct the proceedings in a bigger court hall.

The judge said that the authorities were aware of this and arrangements would be made to shift to a bigger hall.

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