Thrissur Pooram disruption: Govt returns SIT report over lack of evidence against Ajith Kumar, others
Mail This Article
Thiruvananthapuram: The Keralam government has returned the Crime Branch investigation report into the disruption of the 2024 Thrissur Pooram, citing a lack of concrete evidence against those accused, including ADGP M R Ajith Kumar and seeking further clarity on the findings.
The report, submitted by the Special Investigation Team (SIT), had sought permission to name 10 office-bearers of the Thiruvambady Devaswom as accused under charges including criminal conspiracy and incitement to riot. However, the government found that the allegations were not backed by sufficient evidence.
Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala has directed the State Police Chief to submit a fresh report with additional explanations and clearer evidence. The government has also sought a more detailed account of the lapses identified during the investigation.
The development brings the controversial Pooram disruption investigation back to the police department, after it had remained a contentious issue during the previous government's tenure.
The SIT, headed by former Crime Branch chief H. Venkatesh, was constituted after the Home Department rejected a report submitted by ADGP M R Ajith Kumar in 2024. The 15-page SIT report had identified 16 lapses on the part of the police and Devaswom officials during the festival. It had also pointed out that Devaswom employees had disregarded police instructions.
However, the government has flagged three major shortcomings in the latest report.
First, while the SIT sought permission to prosecute 10 Thiruvambady Devaswom office-bearers for alleged conspiracy and incitement to riot, it failed to provide specific evidence substantiating the charges.
Second, the report merely observed that ADGP M R Ajith Kumar, who was responsible for overseeing the Pooram arrangements, had displayed a lack of vigilance. However, the SIT failed to establish sufficient evidence to recommend any action against him.
Third, the report did not specify what action should be taken against other police personnel found to have committed lapses during the festival.