Goondas Act for Seer?

NT Bureau
Chennai, Jan 13:

It is a virtual free for all now. In terms of rumours, that is. It is now increasingly difficult to sift the truth from falsehoods and conjectures in the Seer case. And adding to the problem is the fact that some rumours have also turned out to be true in this case.

This morning the most happening report doing the rounds was that the Kanchi Sankaracharya Sri Jayendra Saraswati was to be secured under the dreaded Goondas Act.
Though there was no official communication on it till late afternoon, reports had it that moves were afoot at the Kancheepuram Collectorate to arrest the Seer under the Goondas Act —usually reserved for habitual offenders and criminals with multiple charges.

Government officials were not in a position to either confirm or deny the report. But those close to the Mutt said that they had also received information that a move to such an effect was afoot.

But as a confirmed news it can be said that that the Sankaracharya was summoned to appear before the Special investigating team probing cases related to the Mutt in Kancheepuram this morning. But summons, which had been served yesterday, was also withdrawn this morning. It was related to Thirukoshtiyur Madhavan assault case. But with an anticipatory bail application of the Seer pending before the Principals Session Court, it was surprising that summons were issued in the case.

Anyway, the police 'orally' withdrew the summons issued on the Kanchi Sankaracharya to appear before them by 10.30 am today, Mutt advocate A Shanmugam said.

Shanmugam had informed the police that the summons were not legally enforceable under the CrPC, he told reporters after meeting officers of the Special Investigation Team, probing the cases against the Kanchi seers.

He cited a Supreme Court judgement, which said that an accused could not be summoned for questioning like a witness.

Shanmugham said he had also pointed out that Kalavai, where the seer is presently staying, was outside the jurisdiction of Kancheepuram police and the summons issued by the SIT were not enforceable.

The police agreed to the points mentioned and told him that they would have to consult the prosecution lawyer, as he (Shanmugham) had raised some legal points, he said.

Shanmugam said that Jayendra Saraswati, on receiving the summons, had stated that he would cooperate, but said that it would be convenient if the time was changed to 3.30 pm as he had to perform poojas.

But investigation officer Sakthivelu said it could be postponed only up to 1100 a.m., after which the legal option was resorted to, Shanmugam said.

On the police freezing 183 bank accounts of the Mutt and several trusts, he said the daily activities of the Mutt had come to a standstill and their social welfare activities had been paralysed.

Though the police had orally informed him about the freezing of accounts, the Mutt had not received any written communication, he said.

Shanmugam said that the Mutt had constituted a legal panel, which would go into the 'leak' of video clippings of the seer's custodial interrogation to some satellite television networks and the freezing of bank accounts.

The talking point among the public was also the leaked clippings from the seer's alleged confession while in police custody in the Sankararaman murder case.