"Most amazing and shocking," remarked special judge John Michael Cunha, pointing out the retraction by IAS and IPS officers, including the vigilance officer who registered the FIR in the case, besides several officials of state departments, from their earlier depositions.
A total of 76 prosecution witnesses were recalled by the court in 2000, when the trial was going on in Chennai, on the application filed by the accused. The manner in which 64 of them casually, without any rhyme or reason, backtracked from their earlier depositions cannot be dismissed as a trivial act of dishonesty or hostility of witnesses, Cunha said.
READ ALSO: Foster son's mega marriage proved to be Jaya's undoing
Pointing out that a large number of the witnesses were government officials attached to either public works department, police department or the vigilance wing of the state government, which is directly under the control of the chief minister, the judge said: "Most amazing and shocking part of the proceedings is that even the deputy inspector general of police (V C Perumal, IPS), who registered the FIR in his official capacity as the head of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), himself has been a victim of this malaise. It may also be relevant to note that the course adopted by the accused to subvert the course of justice and manoeuvre the witnesses prompted the case to be transferred to this court."
Witnesses 'told' to retract
Cunha also said that after the case was transferred to Bangalore, 23 of witnesses told the court that their original statements were true and correct, and that they were constrained to deviate from their original statement due to compulsion or such other factors. "Therefore, merely because the witnesses have rescinded from their earlier version during their further cross-examination, cannot by itself be a factor to disbelieve their testimony," he concluded.
As for the defence argument that such witnesses should be ignored because they had been giving inconsistent evidence at two different stages, the judge said testimony of such witnesses cannot be thrown out, but required to be analysed with caution and circumspection. The special court was fortunate to have evidence that corroborated the evidence of persons who somersaulted during trial, Cunha said. "Fortunately, in the instant case, there is sufficient corroboration to the testimony of the majority of hostile witnesses, either by way of contemporaneously prepared valuation reports or the mahazars and the testimony of the other witnesses acquainted with the case," he said.
'Take Cauvery, give Amma'
As protests peaked against Jayalalithaa's conviction and incarceration, AIADMK cadres put up a poster in Madurai that said: "Keep Cauvery, Give Amma...Weeping Tamil Nadu."
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/followceleb.cms?alias=Jayalalithaa in jail,Jayalalithaa's conviction,John Michael Cunha
Stay updated on the go with The Times of India's mobile apps. Click here to download it for your device.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
Officials in Tamil Nadu retract, but fail to save Jayalalithaa from jail term
Dengan url
http://sehatnyasusu.blogspot.com/2014/10/officials-in-tamil-nadu-retract-but.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
Officials in Tamil Nadu retract, but fail to save Jayalalithaa from jail term
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
Officials in Tamil Nadu retract, but fail to save Jayalalithaa from jail term
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar