The charge against former minister KM Mani is that he took Rs 1 crore as bribe from bar owners. Onmanorama/File photoThiruvananthapuram: Dramatic scenes were witnessed in the Vigilance court here while it was considering a report that gave a clean chit to former finance minister K M Mani in the bar bribery case. The court later posted the hearing to June 6.
While the court was taking up the pleas against the report, the special prosecutor and Vigilance counsel entered into an argument over who would appear for the Vigilance. After the hearing was adjourned, the government relieved K P Satheesan from the post of special prosecutor. The argument between the lawyers disrupted the court procedures for some time.
Six petitions, including one by former chief minister V S Achuthanandan, were filed before the court seeking rejection of the Vigilance report. LDF convener Vaikom Viswan and agriculture minister V S Sunil Kumar, who had filed similar petitions earlier did not do so this time.
As soon as the court took up the report, the Vigilance counsel and Mani’s advocate objected to the presence of the special prosecutor. The Vigilance counsel said that the government had not issued any orders appointing the special prosecutor in vigilance court. The special prosecutor should appear only before the High Court, he said.
Satheesan, the special prosecutor, said that the Vigilance counsel was raising the objection due to ignorance of the law. As special prosecutor, Satheesan said that he could appear in all cases related to the bar bribery scam before any court. When Mani’s advocate demanded that Satheesan should be shifted from the post of special prosecutor, the court asked him what rights the lawyer representing the defendant has to make such a statement.
“Will the earth collapse if the special prosecutor appears before the court,” it further asked. The court also sought the government’s stand on the matter.
Following which, six objection petitions, including those by Achuthanandan, bar owner Biju Ramesh, BJP leader V Muraleedharan, P K Raju and the lawyers’ body of CPI were filed. When Sunil Kumar and Vaikom Viswan did not appear, the court ordered that notices be send to them and postponed the hearing to June 6.
Soon after the court proceedings, the government conveyed its decision to remove Satheesan from his post. Vigilance director N C Asthana had earlier complained to the home secretary against the stands taken by Satheesan. Satheesan was appointed when Jacob Thomas was the Vigilance director. Speaking to media, Satheesan said that there was strong evidence against Mani.
While the UDF was in power, the then vigilance SP R Sukesan had twice submitted before the court reports which said that Mani had no role in the case. However, the court had rejected the reports. After the LDF came to power, the government ordered a probe into the bar bribery case a third time. The new investigating officer DySP Shyam Kumar started his work in August 2017. Subsequently, a report was filed before the court saying that there was no evidence in the case and the investigation was being closed. The High Court too was informed of the matter.
The charge against Mani is that he took Rs 1 crore as bribe from bar owners. Biju Ramesh had alleged that Mani had demanded Rs 5 crore for reopening 48 bars.
Read more: Latest Kerala news
