Kanchi Seer case: Pinpoint the evidence, SC tells TN police

New Delhi, Jan. 6. (PTI): The Supreme Court, which began hearing on the Kanchi Sankaracharya's bail plea in the Sankararaman murder case, today repeatedly asked the Tamil Nadu police to "pinpoint" the evidence linking the Seer to the offence.

Repeated queries by a Bench headed by Chief Justice R C Lahoti evoked little response from Counsel for the Tamil Nadu Government which is opposing the bail.

"We only want to know whether you have a case against the Sankaracharya and if so, what are the pieces of evidence against him, apart from the motive arising from the letters written by the deceased levelling wild allegations against the Pontiff," the Bench asked.

Appearing for the Tamil Nadu Government, K T S Tulsi, who handed over the case diary and other evidence in a sealed cover, said the prosecution has "direct evidence" linking the Seer to the conspiracy to kill Sankararaman.

The arguments would continue in the afternoon.

Appearing for the Sankaracharya, senior advocate Fali Nariman, sought to drill holes in the prosecution theory linking the Seer to the murder and said even on basic facts like payment of money to the assailants, the Tamil Nadu police has been changing its stand.

He said first, the police claimed that Rs. 50 lakhs were withdrawn from the Mutt's ICICI bank branch for the purpose of giving payments to the assailants. But when the Mutt pointed out that no such money was ever withdrawn from the ICICI Bank, the police changed its stand and claimed the money was received from a land sale agreement and was kept in the Seer's room till its dispersal after the murder in September, he added.

He pointed out that one of the managers of the Kanchi Mutt, who is under arrest at present, has told the trial court that the money received from sale of land was deposited in Indian Overseas Bank in May last year, much before the murder.

Faced with this kind of contradiction, Tulsi made a statement that accounts of the Mutt appear to have been tampered with and the police is yet to find the truth in it.

The court, finding that the prosecution was not pinpointing the evidence against Sankaracharya, had to ask the Counsel three times that "what are the specific pieces of evidence against the Sankaracharya. Let us pinpoint the evidence. What is the grave motive for commission of crime?"

Tulsi pointed out that Sankararaman had grave differences with the functioning of the Mutt and the activities of the Sankaracharya and had written 39 letters levelling allegations against the Seer to various authorities including the Commissioner of Charity.

The court asked it is understandable to take note of prosecution theory that those letters could provide evidence for motive but was anything done pursuant to these letters either by the Mutt or Sankaracharya against Sankararaman. The Tamil Nadu police didn't have any evidence to cite about the reactionary measures either from the Mutt or the Sankaracharya.

Tulsi then said in any offence punishable with death or life imprisonment and in which there is confessional statements of co-accused, the main accused cannot be granted bail as has been held by the Supreme Court in the Pappu Yadav case.

The court observed that the Pappu Yadav case, which was decided more on its facts, had no bearing on this case.

The Tamil Nadu police through Tulsi argued that it was the Sankaracharya who alone had the motive to kill Sankararaman, who was exposing him and the Mutt.

He said several of the witnesses in the case were employees of the Kanchi Mutt and if the Seer was released on bail, these witnesses would not be able to depose against him.

Tulsi said if the Tamil Nadu police had failed to arrest the Sankaracharya, then there was a definite plan by the Seer with the help of flight schedule and positioning of helicopter, to flee to a foreign country.

The Tamil Nadu police said that by engineering fake surrender of five persons in the Sankararaman case by making payments, the Seer had attempted to dislodge and misdirect the investigation.

Terming that this case would be a conspiracy trial, he said there is direct evidence of conspiracy by the Sankaracharya to eliminate Sankararaman.

Requesting to court not to go deep into the evidence collected by the police so far, Tulsi said it was too premature to weigh the evidence as the chargesheet in the case has not yet been filed.

The arguments spilled over to tomorrow as the court agreed to give an opportunity to Sankaracharya's counsel Fali S Nariman, to reply to the submissions made by the Tamil Nadu police through Tulsi.