KOCHI: High drama prevailed at the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) court in Kochi when the Enforcement Directorate (ED) attempted to play audio clips containing conversations between two primary accused individuals in the Karuvannur Service Cooperative Bank money laundering case on Thursday.
The counsel representing CPM leader P R Aravindakshan, who was arrested in the case, objected to the ED’s move, asserting that the authenticity of the audio clips must be verified before they can be presented.
During the bail petition hearing of Aravindakshan and former bank accountant C K Jilse on October 17, Aravindakshan’s lawyer challenged the ED to produce the alleged audio clips claimed by the national agency. In response, the ED sought to play telephone conversations between Aravindakshan and the prime accused, Satheeskumar P.
They argued that the conversations contained references to financial transactions between the two. The ED’s special prosecutor even set up a CD on the laptop connected to loudspeakers to make the conversation audible to the judge.
However, the defence counsel objected, emphasising that the audio should only be played after the court confirms that it has not been manipulated or edited by the ED.
He insisted that the authenticity of the audio must be established before he can counter the allegations that the ED aims to prove through the audio clips. The defense counsel agreed to submit the audio clips as digital evidence in a sealed cover. The court also stressed the importance of following the proper procedure for playing the audio clip in an open court, noting that if the audio clip is played, it will become part of the court records. Consequently, the ED chose not to play the audio clip and announced that the CD would be handed over to the court when the prosecution complaint in the case is filed. The court reserved its decision on the bail petition until October 25.
Earlier, the defence counsel contended that the funds traced in Aravindakshan’s bank accounts were linked to his business activities. Besides serving as a counsellor at Wadakkanacherry municipality, Aravindakshan operated three granite quarries and a hotel. He had taken three loans from the bank amounting to `70 lakh.
Regarding Jilse, his lawyer argued that the accused had no involvement in any fraudulent activities. It was clarified that others had taken loans by mortgaging his properties.