Gold smuggling: Is Swapna's claim of commissions an attempt to protect Sivasankar?

Gold smuggling: Is Swapna's claim of commissions an attempt to protect Sivasankar?

Kochi: Investigating agencies are examining the veracity of Swapna’s claim that she received huge commissions from many sources as they suspect she could be trying to establish that the Rs 1 crore that was found in her bank lockers was not earned through gold smuggling.

Investigators believe that the bank locker, taken at the behest of M Sivasankar, the former principal secretary to the chief minister, can act as conclusive evidence of his direct links to the illegal transactions of Swapna.

Sivasankar can also be made an accused in the case if it is proved that the money found in the locker was obtained through gold smuggling. Investigators are trying to find out if Swapna’s claim that the money was received as commission for the Life Mission deal is an attempt to protect Sivasankar.

In the initial stages of her interrogations, Swapna had said that she had received $35,000 (Rs 24.50 lakh) from UAFX Solutions, which won the visa stamping contract of the UAE Consulate in Thiruvananthapuram, $30,000 (Rs 21 lakh) from Fourth Force and $70,000 (Rs 49 lakh) from the Car Palace Group as commissions.

'Influence in power corridors'

The Customs has reiterated that Swapna wielded considerable influence in power corridors.

The Customs informed this to court during a hearing into a petition filed by Swapna, seeking a copy of the statements. Objecting to her request, the Customs urged the court to consider what would happen if she were to influence the witnesses.

The Customs had earlier said that the accused was influential in a submission to the court.

Swapna's lawyer contended that the statements were recorded under Section 108 and that she had the right to seek it.

Justice V G Arun postponed pronouncement of the verdict.

The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Onmanorama. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.