Seer case: Give us details, SC tells TN police

Press Trust Of India

New Delhi, January 6: The Supreme Court, which began hearing on the Kanchi Shankaracharya’s bail plea in the Sankararaman murder case, on Thursday 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 the counsel for the Tamil Nadu government which is opposing the bail.

"We only want to know whether you have a case against the Shankaracharya 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 Shankaracharya, 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 He said first, the police claimed that Rs 50 lakh was withdrawn from the mutt's ICICI Bank branch for the purpose of giving payments to the assailants.

Nariman said when the mutt pointed out that no such money was ever withdrawn from the ICICI Bank, the police changed its stand and claimed the money was received from a land sale agreement and was kept in the seer's room till its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 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 Shankaracharya, had to ask the counsel three times that "what are the specific pieces of evidence against the Shankaracharya. Let us pinpoint the evidence. What is the grave motive for commission of crime?"

Tulsi pointed out that sank Raman had grave differences with functioning of the mutt and the activities of the Shankaracharya 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 Shankaracharya against sank Raman.

The Tamil Nadu police didn’t have any evidence to cite about the reactionary measures either from the mutt or the Shankaracharya. 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 Pappu Yadav case. The court observed Pappu Yadav case, which was decided more on its facts, had no bearing on this case. Arguments will continue after lunch.