Manjeswaram election bribery case; clarity in defence's argument becomes setback for prosecution

KASARGOD: The acquittal of all the six accused, including K Surendran, in the Manjeswaram bribery case has come as a major setback to CPM district secretariat member VV Rameshan, who filed the petition, and the police who registered the case.

In the 1,500-page chargesheet, around 120 witnesses, phone call records and several certificates were documented. In the chargesheet filed 16 months later, the accused were charged under sections of intimidation (IPC 506), wrongful confinement (IPC 342), prevention of atrocities against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and giving bribes. The government had appointed Advocate C Shukkur as the special prosecutor in the case.

Legal sources point out that BSP candidate K Sundara, who is the original litigant in the case, did not file a petition, which weakened the case. K Sundara and his mother had changed their statements several times, which also led to the cancellation of the case. The reactions of Sundara and his mother at every stage were produced as evidence by the defence in the court. The defence also pointed out in the court that soon after Sundara made the allegations, his mother responded that no one had given them any bribe. Sundara going to the collectorate and responding to the media after withdrawing his nomination papers and later going to the BJP's election committee office and saying that the nomination was not withdrawn at anyone's instigation or in the name of financial gain, became evidence for the defence. The prosecution could not refute the defence's allegation that Sundara himself came forward with the allegation that he was offered a bribe due to external pressure.

Sundara's reactions after withdrawing his nomination strengthened Surendran's claim that the case was fabricated to defame him and the BJP. The court also took into account the argument that CPM leader VV Rameshan, another candidate from Manjeswaram, filed the petition instead of the original plaintiff in the case due to political motives. The defence told the court that the SC/ST section was also added to prevent him from getting bail in the bribery case and that the case was for political vendetta. There was also a question from the court whether it was not an offence to take a bribe as much as paying a bribe.