Court returns charge sheet in Muthoot murder case

December 08, 2009 07:51 pm | Updated December 17, 2016 05:25 am IST - ALAPPUZHA:

The Ramankary Judicial First Class Magistrate Court on Tuesday returned the charge-sheet filed by the Special Investigation Team probing the Paul Muthoot George murder case, calling for further investigation into various dissimilarities observed by the court.

The court, which summoned Deputy Superintendent of Police K.M. Tomy, who was part of the SIT, gave him a nine-page document detailing technical deficiencies and dissimilarities in the charge-sheet as well as the manner in which the investigation was conducted, asking for these to be rectified and the charge-sheet to be re-filed.

Dissimilarities observed by the court in the charge-sheet, which was submitted on November 19, included the incongruities in statements given by Shibu, the driver of Paul, on the occupants of the Scorpio he was driving while following Paul; why Om Prakash and Rajesh Puthenpalam, who claimed to be close friends of Paul, had escaped without taking him to hospital; why there were only blood stains and no mud on the clothes of key witness Manu, who claimed he had fallen into a nearby paddy field after being attacked; and how Shibu could identify 17 of the accused when he had seen their faces with just a car’s headlight as the light source.

Business deals in which Paul was involved prior to his murder were not probed and the motive for the murder, as stated by the police, was not clear, the court observed, also pointing out that the sequence of events that led to the murder, as stated by the police, was not convincing.

The court also picked on the police version that Paul had stopped his car to check whether there was any damage after he allegedly hit a two-wheeler, which was when the murder occurred. The court observed that this was not convincing since there was no streetlight where Paul is said to have stopped his car.

As for technical shortcomings in the charge-sheet, the medical report which said Om Prakash had liver complications and therefore had to be exempted from the narco-analysis, was not submitted. The court also asked why Rajesh was exempted from the narco-analysis on grounds that he did not know English, more so when the court had allowed a translator. The lack of follow-up on applications submitted by three of the accused to turn approvers was also pointed out by the court.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.