Lawyer highlights inconsistencies in account of events described by the Investigating Officer
On the third day of the closely watched trial of celebrated doctor and activist Binayak Sen, the defence focussed on Piyush Guha, a Kolkata businessman who, along with suspected Maoist leader Narayan Sanyal, is accused of conspiring with Dr. Sen to assist the urban operations of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist).
The prosecution claims that Mr. Guha was arrested on May 6, 2007 near the Raipur railway station with Maoist publications and three letters allegedly written by Narayan Sanyal in jail and passed on by Dr. Sen.
The defence countered and said Mr. Guha was picked up on May 1, 2007, and illegally detained for a week before the police staged his arrest.
Mr. Guha's lawyer, S.K. Farhan, pointed that the prosecution has not produced a single eye-witness, letter, phone transcript or call-log linking Mr. Guha to Dr. Sen. The prosecution's case rests on the testimony of one Anil Kumar Singh, a cloth merchant who claims to have been present at the time of Mr. Guha's arrest.
In court, Mr. Singh claimed to have overheard Mr. Guha saying that Dr. Sen had given him Sanyal's letters, thereby establishing a link between the three.
‘Inconsistencies'
Today, the defence sought to highlight the inconsistencies in the account of events described by Investigating Officer B.S. Jagrit. “Jagrit is no less than superman,” said Mr. Farhan. “According to his statements, he is everywhere, all the time, and works faster than any mortal I have seen,” he said, drawing attention to Mr. Jagrit's testimony that he managed to arrest Mr. Guha, search him twice, find two witnesses, complete all the paperwork consisting of personal search memos, arrest memos and seizure memos, apply for (and receive) written permission from Senior Superintendent of Police B.S. Maravi and deposit all seized items in the police safe house in about 90 minutes.
Keywords: Binayak Sen
