The one-man commission probing the hospitalisation and death of former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa has refused to give exemption to Tughlak editor S. Gurumuthy from deposing in person and has directed him to appear before it at a future date when fresh summons are issued to him.
Refusing to entertain a petition filed by Mr. Gurumuthy, retired Madras High Court judge Justice A. Arumugasamy, who heads the commission, said: “The presence of the petitioner cannot be dispensed with and he is directed to appear in future hearing. Fresh summons will be issued depending upon the necessity.”
This is the second time that Mr. Gurumurthy has sought exemption from appearing before the commission. Mr. Gurumurthy had sent an e-mail on July 22 to the commission stating that the “summons might have been issued under the mistaken impression that he had personal knowledge of the late Chief Minister’s health or visited her during the period of hospitalisation.”
His counsel submitted that Mr. Gurumurthy had no such information and that he had an occasion to meet her in June 2010 at the instance of his friend late Cho S. Ramasamy. He sought an exemption from personal appearance and referred to the Thakkar Natarajan Commission that communicated the questions to him, and was submitted as part of his petition.
However, the counsel for the commission submitted that no material needed to be disclosed for a person to be examined as a witness, and that various professionals including doctors and senior government officials had been summoned and examined by the commission.
Gurumurthy’s allegations
Counsel for V.K. Sasikala, the jailed aide of Jayalalithaa, and Prathap Reddy, chairman, Apollo Hospitals, contended that Mr. Gurumurthy on January 7, 2017, “came forward with allegations against Sasikala and sought an inquiry by constituting a one-man commission; he has given some statement for about 59 seconds regarding the said topic and the documents are available with him.”
In his order, Justice Arumugasamy said: “The present summon has been issued to the petitioner only to examine him as witness, since he is not a person prejudicially affected under Section 8B of the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952.” He further observed that Ilavarasi’s daughter Krishnapriya, Paul Manoj Pandian and R. Sriram, son of Cho Ramasamy, had deposed about certain incidents and some articles published in Tughlak . The commission said it wanted to seek clarifications from him so that it could reach the correct conclusion.
