'Trial court ignored Interpol report': Antony Raju in appeal against conviction, hearing on Jan 24

The appeal petition filed by disqualified MLA Antony Raju in the evidence tampering case has stated that the trial court had ignored reports which indicated foul play by other persons. Thiruvananthapuram District and Sessions Court will consider the case on January 24. 

He has said in his petition that the Magistrate did not consider the Interpol report which revealed that the family members of the accused bribed the clerks of courts and tampered or substituted the underwear. The High Court judgement which indicated foul play and the High Court Vigilance inquiry report which indicated involvement of three persons in the crime were ignored, the petition stated. 

He also cited that the alleged occurrence of crime was in 1990 and the FIR was registered in 1994 and the conviction was ordered in 2026. This 36-year delay has gravely prejudiced him and it was not even considered by the trial court, according to the appeal petition. 

The Nedumangad Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I on January 3, sentenced MLA Antony Raju to three years’ imprisonment after finding him guilty in the 1990 evidence-tampering case involving an Australian national, Andrew Salvatore Cervelli, who was arrested at the Thiruvananthapuram airport for possession of 61.6 grams of charas.

 The court sentenced the first accused, K S Jose, and the second accused, Antony Raju, to six months for criminal conspiracy, three years for causing the disappearance of evidence, three years for publishing false evidence, and two years for forgery. He was automatically disqualified as an MLA following the conviction in the case. 

According to the prosecution, Antony Raju, then a junior lawyer, who represented Cervelli, had allegedly conspired with a court clerk named K Jose to obtain the underwear from the court's material objects room. It was alleged that Raju took the garment, had it re-stitched to a smaller size, and returned it to the court four months later to ensure it would not fit his client during the High Court hearing.

In his petition, Antony Raju has sought suspension of sentence and conviction citing that unlike the sentence of imprisonment, the disqualification under the Representation of People Act is self-executing and instantaneous, leaving no scope for restitution unless the conviction itself is suspended.