Kerala's Thalassery Court reserves verdict on former district panchayat president PP Divya's bail application, charged with abetting Additional District Magistrate Naveen Babu's suicide, after hearing arguments from defense, prosecution, and deceased's family.
Kannur: The Thalassery District Court will deliver its verdict on Friday regarding the bail application of former district panchayat president PP Divya, who has been charged with abetting the suicide of Additional District Magistrate (ADM) Naveen Babu. The court postponed its decision after hearing arguments from Divya’s defense, the prosecution, and the family of the deceased ADM.
In today’s proceedings, Divya's lawyer, Advocate K. Vishwan, argued that the ADM had been involved in a bribery incident. He claimed that the ADM had accepted a bribe from Prashanthan, who was later suspended from his position for the alleged act. Vishwan further contended that Divya was not involved in any illegal activity, and emphasized circumstantial evidence suggesting that Prashanthan took a gold loan of Rs 1 lakh from a cooperative bank, and that the ADM and Prashanth were present in the same tower location the following day. The defense lawyer requested the court to grant Divya bail, asserting that the available evidence was insufficient to support the serious charges.
In response, the prosecution questioned whether a phone conversation between the ADM and Prashanth could be considered solid proof of bribery. They pointed out that there were disciplinary violations, including bribery allegations, against Prashanth, but emphasized that no concrete evidence had been provided to support the claim that the phone call was linked to bribery. Gangadharan, the prosecution lawyer, argued that there was no proof that Prashanth had taken a loan to pay a bribe, and noted that the allegation of bribery was merely Prashanth’s claim without corroborating evidence. The prosecution also questioned why corruption would be linked to a case where there had been no delays in the Kannur file under investigation. Moreover, there was no proof or witnesses to substantiate the bribery claim, and no allegations of corruption had been made against Naveen Babu, the deceased ADM.
The prosecution further argued that granting bail to Divya could potentially influence witnesses, and therefore, bail should be denied.
Meanwhile, the family of the deceased ADM strongly opposed the bail application. They alleged that the police had shielded Divya by failing to arrest her promptly and criticized the police for not recording the statement of the ADM’s wife. Despite receiving two notices, Divya had not cooperated with the investigation, they claimed. The family rejected Divya’s defense that she had no intention of causing the suicide and argued that the claim of the ADM’s confession to the Collector was false. The Collector, according to the family, was not someone with whom the ADM had a close relationship, and the purported confession to him was fabricated. The family further insisted that the Collector’s statement had been part of a conspiracy with Divya, and demanded an examination of the Collector’s phone records to investigate the matter further.
Also Read: Kerala: Red Sand Boa treated for tumour in first-of-its kind at Thiruvananthapuram Zoo