CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has directed a special court for MP/MLA cases to complete the trial in the 2016 gutkha scam case within 12 weeks.
The direction was issued by Justice G K Ilanthiraiyan recently on a petition filed by former commissioner of Greater Chennai Police S George. He had prayed for a direction to the special court to remove the persons cited as prosecution witnesses whose statements under Section 161 of the CrPC were not furnished to him, or provide the Section 161 CrPC statements of all the prosecution witnesses whom the prosecution proposes to examine, in compliance with Sections 173(5) and 207 of the CrPC.
Since his petition in this regard was rejected by the special court for MP/MLA cases, George filed the criminal original petition in the high court.
George is the 20th accused in the gutkha scam, a CBI-investigated case relating to the alleged illegal manufacture and sale of banned gutkha products in Tamil Nadu, in which senior police and government officials are accused of facilitating the trade. Former AIADMK ministers C Vijayabaskar and BV Ramana, and retired IPS officer TK Rajendran are among the other accused.
His counsel submitted that the petitioner has a right to fair investigation and fair trial, which includes the right to scrutinise the materials relied upon by the prosecution.
Though the prosecution has stated in the final report that 278 persons have been cited as witnesses, the statements of 127 witnesses have not been recorded. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to furnish all the statements and documents in compliance with Section 207 of CrPC, he told the court, adding that it is incumbent upon the trial court to furnish all the documents to the accused to ensure a fair trial.
Justice Ilanthiraiyan noted that it would amount to a denial of a fair trial if any recorded statements were not furnished to the petitioner, but in the present case the prosecution did not record the statements of certain witnesses. “Therefore, the petitioner cannot compel the prosecution to record the statements of those witnesses,” he said, and held that the trial court had rightly rejected the memo of the former police officer.
Stating that the petitioner is at liberty to raise the said ground as a defence before the trial court, the judge directed the trial court to proceed with the trial and complete it within 12 weeks.