'Kurian never named by Prosecutrix'

Shasthamangalam S Ajith Kumar is regarded as one of the best trial lawyer in the State of Kerala. He was the junior of Shri. K.P Radhakrishna Menon, who later got elevated as High Court Judge. He was also the junior of famous criminal lawyer Kottur Gopala Krishna Pillai. He has appeared in a number of high profile cases which got wide media attention. He also worked as a Special Prosecutor for Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) and Revenue Intelligence and Customs.

He has represented eight accused in Suryanelli case, including Accused no.2. Given below is the transcript of his interview with Nebil Nizar and Vimal Koshy.


1- Could you brief us about the trial?
Ajith Kumar: A Sessions Court in Kottayam was notified as a Special Court for trying this case. Sasidharan Nambiar was the Sessions Judge. Suresh Babu Thomas was the Special Public Prosecutor.

The trial was a split one because Dharmarjan was at large and could not be traced, so charges were laid against 40 persons and taken on file by the Special Court. The second trial, was started when Dharmarajan surrendered.

2- Why was this case entrusted to a special team?
Ajith Kumar: This case got a lot of media attention and the Government had then entrusted this case to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by Deputy IG Sibi Mathews. Joshwa was then a Dy.SP. Siby Mathews had an image as that of an excellent Investigating officer.


3- KK Joshwa, then a member of this SIT strongly came out against the then SIT Chief. How do you view this?
Ajith Kumar: I Know Siby Mathews personally. When N Ram wrote an article on Siby Mathews in frontline containing some defamatory remarks, he engaged me to file a defamatory suit against Ram. Siby Mathews is a man of character. You cannot influence him. He never mixes official and personal matters. He is an incredibly credible officer.

In Suryanelli case, I and Siby Mathews were on different poles. He was the SIT Chief and I was the counsel appearing for eight accused in the case.

During the trial, Siby Mathews and Joshua were working like one soul and two bodies. They were seen working together to ensure a conviction. There was not even a murmur, a dissent or anything from the side of Joshwa. I strongly believe that Joshua now came out against Siby to wreck personal vengeance.


4- Justice Basant (as he then was) is in news for wrong reasons. His decision in Suryanelli case is widely criticised. His statement during a personal conversation kicked start controversy. How do you view all this?
Ajith Kumar:  I Know R Basant for the past 28years. I have represented cases before him. I have argued first and second appeals before him.

I had a serious difference of opinion with him regarding the way he appreciates evidence, he is a person who believes that provisions under the Code of Criminal Procedure are intended to see that an accused is ultimately found guilty and convicted.

I even submitted before him that his decisions would throw to wind the traditional principles of appreciating evidence. He smiled and said: ‘Ajith Kumar, please understand that there is a change in time’. He was a convicting Judge.

Just of the reason that he has decided against me in a couple of cases does not make me speak against him. I admit that R Basant was an Honest Judge with Character and Integrity. He is a very hard working individual who believes that he is the seat of Justice, and Justice must be administered.

I feel really bad when persons who do even know who he was, accuse him of wrong things.  

5-Director General of Prosecution T Asaf Ali has given a legal opinion that Further Investigation is not necessary, any comments?
Ajith Kumar: Even if I was the DGP, I would have given the same legal opinion. If further Investigation is ordered, then the entire case would collapse. Prosecution got two convictions (Trial 1 and 2). He might be hopeful of a Conviction from the High Court from the settings of the things.

But, if you have any regard for truth, this case should be opened up. State Government should ask CBI to investigate this case. 

6- How do you see Dharmarajan’s revelations to media?
Ajith Kumar:  Dharmarajan is a convicted accused. He has jumped parole and is at large. He is the son of a lawyer and brother of a sitting Judge. Dharmarajan himself is a Law graduate and a Lawyer. We cannot presume that he is ignorant of Law and its technicalities. We cannot believe the version of a convict.

7- Did the local Police who investigated this case, had a genuine interest to prove the case?
Ajith Kumar: Initial investigation was done by one Mr. Mathews, Circle Inspector. He turned hostile during the trial and was grilled by the Prosecution.

Mathews recorded a statement of the Prosecutrix during the course of his Investigation, in which there was no rape or allegation of rape. She added that she went on her own, she met Dharmarajan and went to so many places, met Usha (Accused 2) at Kanyakumari (SIT version is that they met at Kottayam).

Mr. Suresh Babu Thomas, learned Special Public Prosecutor stoutly denied the existance of such a letter and alleged that Mathews had cooked up a story.

During the 2^nd Suryanelli Trial, the Defence side was successfully able to get hold of a communication from the Circle Inspector Mathew to Deputy Inspector General (DIG) saying that such a statement was recorded. Having no other way, the Prosecution admitted the existence of such a statement from the part of the girl to Circle Inspector Mathews.

8- Dharmarajan who jumped parole and now at large giving an interview to a private channel from an undisclosed location, speaks about Police tortures and how statements were extracted out of them. Did any of the persons whom you represented complaint so?
Ajith Kumar: Everybody was treated in the most cruellest manner. Mr. Cherian, an accused in this case has said to me about his experience at Devikulam Police Station. They were stripped naked and inhuman treatment was inflicted on them which even Hitler did not do at the Concentration Camps. This continued till 03:00am.

The sad fact is that none of the accused made complaint against the torture.

9- Do you think that the Investigation by SIT was not fair?
Ajith Kumar: Most of the witnesses in this case was threatened by Police. Most of the witnesses statements were recorded under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure before a Magistrate. During the trial stage, all of them were threatened with Perjury.

The evidence upon which Siby Mathews relied on was that of a Prostitute from Mundakayam, Kottayam, who took part in the whole process. Instead of arraying her as an accused, Siby Mathews deleted her from that list and made her a witness and statement under 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded.


10- Do you think that this case needs to be re-investigated?
Ajith Kumar: This case should definitely be Re-Investigated. Central Bureau of Investigation is that apt agency. The State Government should show the courage to do that.


11-  Now the main stream media is busy discussing the involvement of present Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman PJ Kurian, what you have got to say about this?
Ajith Kumar: None of the persons whom I represented at the trial said me about PJ Kurian. They all said that they were all falsely arrayed as accused, I am pretty sure that Kurian was nowhere in picture.

During the first trial, I was present in the court all the time during this In-Camera trial, the prosecutrix has never ever named P.J Kurian.



(Originally published at http://glctvpmlaw.blogspot.in/2013/02/kurian-never-named-by-prosecutrix.html)