Nedumkandam: The Crime Branch team probing the June 21 custodial death of financier Kumar has rubbished the findings of the Nedumkandam police and even claimed he was made a guinea pig by cops to ‘experiment’ with torture methods.
Though the police had initially stated the death of the 49-year-old remand prisoner was ‘unnatural,’ the Crime Branch in its remand report submitted on Friday to the Peermade judicial first-class magistrate court said the case was of a ‘murder.’
The Crime Branch has also charged four policemen accused in the case, including sub-inspector Sabu and civil police officer Sajeev Antony, with serious offences. The charges they carry include murder, inflicting physical harm using an extraneous object or weapon, unauthorised detention behind three days, and inflicting injury in custody to extract confession.
Meanwhile, two cops have reportedly gone into hiding after their colleagues were charged with murder. There has been no information about driver Niyaz and ASI Rejimon of late. The Crime Branch had found that Niyaz had tortured Kumar.
Sources said the police also used chilli spray and chilli paste on the injuries to aggravate pain. An Ayurveda masseur was summoned to the police station after the police found that the knee cap of the accused had been damaged.
Sources also said a policeman had brought the masseur to the station and the policemen paid Rs. 300 for his services.
The Crime Branch report stated the cops used third-degree torture on his limbs, making it difficult for Kumar to walk and move about. Kumar was kept in custody and tortured From June 12 till 15. The policemen, who knew well that physical assault could cause death, did not hesitate to inflict injuries, the report added.
Earlier, the autopsy report had stated that Kumar was subjected to the notorious custodial torture known locally as 'uruttal' which is practised by rolling a heavy wooden log over a person.
Cops in sub-jail
SI sabu and CPO Sajeev Antony, the two main accused as listed by the Crime Branch, are lodged in the Peermade sub-jail now. Sources said they were treated like other prisoners. They slept on the floor and had breakfast with the others.
The two cops are in different cells, sources said.
Sajeev was bought to the jail at 5 am on Thursday. Sabu, who had fainted after his arrest was recorded, was initially taken to a hospital. Jail authorities had taken his custody from the hospital in Kottayam.
The Peermade magistrate court will hear Sabu’s bail plea today.
Many complaints against Idukki SP, says CM
The role of the Idukki district police chief is under a cloud over Kumar's arrest and subsequent death.
There have been many complaints against the Superintendent of Police (SP), Idukki, Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan stated.
The complaints were being examined and action would be taken after that, he said in the state capital Thursday.
Some errant police officers had been dismissed. Kumar's family members are satisfied with the ongoing crime branch investigation, Pinarayi said adding they had met him earlier. The chief minister said he was unaware of any adverse remarks alleged made by minister M.M. Mani on Kumar.
The CM also said there was no need for a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation at this juncture.
Report not submitted to DGP
The crime branch team did not submit the investigation report in the case to director-general of police (DGP) Loknath Behera. There was some confusion after the state ordered a judicial probe into the issue.
The crime branch report reportedly says that Haritha Finance, the company which Kumar managed, had collected Rs.2 crore from unsuspecting customers.
The police had seized Rs. 1.50 lakh from Kumar when he was arrested. He had bought a brand new car by paying Rs. 1 lakh. The actual cost of the car was Rs. 8 lakh and the vehicle was taken away by the dealer after he failed to pay up the rest.
The investigators found that Kumar had made deposits in banks in Ettumanoor, Kuttikanam, and Moolamattom. He had travelled to Tamil Nadu on many occasions.
The CM said the Crime Branch investigation would be free of outside influence. The state government would take steps on the basis on the report of the judicial inquiry commission, constituted under the Commission of Inquiries Act 1952.
The commission would look into multiple aspects such as how did the custody death happen; what transpired when Kumar was taken into custody; was Kumar tortured in jail; who were responsible; and why was Kumar shifted back and forth from custody to hospital to jail.
It would also make recommendations to prevent custody deaths and torture.
The next cabinet meeting will give a final shape to the terms of reference of the commission.
