KOCHI: Former Director General of Police (DGP) T P Senkumar on Friday submitted before the Ernakulam Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) that the team currently investigating the Jisha murder case did not have much evidence to collect, before arresting the accused. Senkumar made it clear that almost all the evidence were already collected by the team that conducted the initial investigation. He filed the rejoinder in response to a counter affidavit filed by the State Government on a petition filed by him challenging his removal from the post of the State Police Chief.
The government had submitted that the manner in which the previous police team carried out the investigation was an everlasting shame to the State Police.
Senkumar said the government’s submission that the former State Police Chief’s report, submitted five days after the murder, did not indicate the time of registering the FIR, was false.
Details of the investigation that took place under Senkumar were presented before the High Court. “In the case, vital evidence such as DNA, fingerprint, hair sample and footwear of the accused were collected from the crime scene through painstaking investigation. Further, forensic odontology and cyber forensic were extensively used in the probe. It is the logical outcome of such scientific investigation that would result not only in the arrest of the accused, but also in successful prosecution,” said the statement.
Senkumar pointed out that a case was registered at Kuruppumpady station at 9.30 pm on April 28, and all possible evidence were collected by the investigation team in the next two days. While registering the FIR, it was clearly mentioned that since the computer of the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) was not functioning, the details were recorded in the general diary of the police station.
The report submitted by ADGP Sreelekha clearly stated that hardware problems occurred in the computer system, because the government did not provide resources for its upkeep.
The initial probe team had gathered all the evidence, including most of the scientific evidence, that led to identification of the assailant’s DNA from five different points. The detection of fingerprints, foreign hair, suspected knife and the chappals worn by the assailant were collected by the first team.