'P P Divya did not cooperate with investigation', claims Naveen's family; Arguments in bail petition...

KANNUR: The family of Naveen Babu, alongside the prosecution, presented compelling arguments against PP Divya's bail plea in today's court session. Although the defense countered each point, the prosecution and Naveen’s family made strong cases to challenge her release.

Defense arguments

The defense argued that Prasanthan, a petrol pump applicant who allegedly paid a bribe, was suspended from his job—an event that they claim aligns with the ADM’s accusations of bribery. The ADM reportedly had phone conversations with Prasanthan and met him in person, with circumstantial evidence showing that Prasanthan took out a gold loan of ₹1 lakh on October 5, allegedly to fund this bribe.

The defense also noted that the collector’s statement was overlooked during the prosecution's review of Divya’s anticipatory bail application. They suggested that video footage of the collector’s statement should be reviewed. They cited the judgment rejecting Divya’s bail, which stated there was no clear intention on her part to lead Naveen Babu to suicide.

The defense highlighted the hardships faced by Divya's family, including her daughter’s educational challenges and her father’s deteriorating health. They insisted that Divya had cooperated with the investigation and would continue to do so if released, even offering to accept additional conditions imposed by the court.

Prosecution's standpoint

The prosecution challenged the defense's claims, asking whether a phone call could definitively establish that a bribe was involved. They questioned the evidence linking Prasanthan’s bank loan to any alleged bribe payment.

They noted Naveen Babu’s clean record, pointing out that he joined the service at the age of 19 with no prior allegations against him. Furthermore, the prosecution emphasized that there was neither evidence nor witnesses to support claims of a financial transaction. Both the ADM and Teacher Gangadharan testified that no money was exchanged and the ADM had not solicited any payments.

Naveen Babu’s family argued that Divya and the collector had conspired against Naveen. They called for a review of the collector's phone records, suggesting that the police’s failure to promptly arrest Divya was a sign of possible influence on the investigation. Additionally, the family expressed concern that the police did not take a statement from the ADM’s wife and stated that Divya ignored two notices requesting her cooperation.

They refuted the defense’s claim that Divya had no intention of driving Naveen Babu to suicide, describing it as baseless.

The family further argued that the collector did not testify directly in the revenue inquiry but instead provided a written statement after consulting legal advisors. They questioned why no action was taken against Prasanthan if bribery indeed occurred and whether the Zilla Panchayat president should have intervened if a government employee suggested opening a petrol pump.

Call records dispute

In court, phone records were presented that allegedly show communication between TV Prasanthan and Naveen Babu. The defense questioned the ADM's calls to Prasanthan, pointing out that the two had no prior acquaintance and that Naveen had never called Prasanthan before this incident.