CHENNAI: As political slugfest over the Kodanad murder-cum-burglary case continued, two new cases — one favouring, and the other opposing, further investigation of the crime — have been filed in the Madras high court.
While one case sought permission to interrogate former chief minister Edappadi K Palaniswami, another former CM J Jayalalithaa’s confidante V K Sasikala, her sister-in-law J Ilavarasi and others in connection with the murder, the other filed by a witness sought to stall the ongoing trial at an Ooty court.
The petition, filed jointly by Deepu and A Santhosh Samy of Thrissur and M S Satheesan of Vattanthara to interrogate nine people, including Palaniswami and Sasikala, was, however, rejected by the Nilgiris sessions judge on April 30.
Assailing the rejection, they have now moved the high court saying police had filed the chargesheet in a hasty manner, and that it was difficult to believe that only a few watches and a glass doll had been stolen in the murder-burglary incident.
‘Prime culprits left out in Kodanad case’
After the demise of Jayalalithaa, Kodanad estate was under the control of Sasikala and Ilavarasi and they alone are in a position to depose about the valuables missing after the crime took place, they said.When they sought legal aid, an office-bearer of the AIADMK lawyers’ wing appointed to assist them in conduct the case, they said, adding that it made it clear that the entire proceedings had been influenced and monitored by persons holding power in the former ruling party (AIADMK).
Investigation in the case failed to conduct a transparent inquiry and it miserably left out prime culprits, they said.
However, another petition filed by N Ravi of Coimbatore, a prosecution witness in the case, sought an early completion of the trial, and wanted day-to-day proceedings so it could be completed within a stipulated time. He said Kanagaraj was known to him, and added: “On April 28, 2017 at 8pm, while I was watching a movie at Brookfield cinema theatre in Coimbatore, he called me on my mobile phone and said he and his friends had committed murder at Kodanadu estate bungalow in the course of committing robbery. I suggested that he surrender before police, and Kanagaraj surrendered before Sankagiri DSP.”
Claiming that he had been threatened by various sources that further investigation in the case was going to take place and that I must give a witness statement according to the requirement, he said: “I came to understand that in the above murder case trial, the prosecution had nearly examined 41 witnesses… So far, from April 2021 to till today not even one defence witness was examined before the trial court and the adjournment are being sought on various grounds from time to time.”
He, therefore, sought a direction for the early examination of witnesses and completion of trial.
On Monday, after an urgent mention was made by counsel for the petitioner, Justice M Nirmal Kumar agreed to hear the plea on August 24.
