KOCHI: The Kerala High Court on Friday ordered further investigation into the car accident that claimed the life of violinist Balabhaskar in 2018.
The court observed that it is quite unfortunate to note that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) which was expected to ponder its serious attention to 20 suspicious circumstances, took the matter in a casual and lackadaisical manner, and deputed an Inspector, lower in rank to the earlier investigating officer, to conduct the further investigation.
No efforts were taken by the Inspector in the further investigation to adopt the professional dexterity of an investigating agency like the CBI to unravel the truth by working out on the above suspicious circumstances. That being so, the request of the parents of the deceased musician to embark upon a further investigation by a competent officer, cannot be discarded even though the elapse of much time might have resulted in effacing of evidence.
Justice G Girish issued the order on a petition filed by K C Unni and B Santhakumari, father and mother of the deceased Balabhaskar, challenging the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram, dismissing their plea for further investigation.
Advocate T M Raman Kartha, counsel for the petitioners, submitted that a Single Judge had directed the investigating officer to conduct further investigation, to identify whether there was any conspiracy or connection between the activities of gold smuggling and the accident on September 25, 2018, leading to the death of Balabhaskar.
But, instead of conducting further probe by the very same investigating officer, who or any other officer of the same rank or above, an inspector of the CBI undertook the further investigation, and filed a further report reiterating the findings of the earlier investigating officer.
The court said that the act of the inspector believing the explanation of Prakash Thampi, a close friend of Balabhaskar, on the entry in the relevant medical record of the Medical College Hospital about the shifting of Balabhaskar against medical advice, and the reason stated for keeping the mobile phone of Balabhaskar in the portable wooden pooja room of his house till it was recovered in a search conducted by the DRI after about eight months from the date of incident in a case relating to gold smuggling, are only a few of such instances of fallacy in further investigation.
The failure of the inspector to take necessary steps for conducting brain mapping and lie detector test, despite the willingness of the artist Kalabhavan Soby George, who made the disclosure that he had seen the accused involved in gold smuggling attacking the vehicle of Balabhaskar at the time of incident, is another instance of laxity committed in further probe.