Court directs Jail supdt to permit solar scam accused prepare

A Court in Kerala today directed the Superintendent of Jail for women, Attakulnagara, to permit Saritha S Nair, an accused in the Solar Panel scam, to prepare her written complaint, if any, 'uninfluenced' by anybody else and forward the same to the court concerned by July 31.
The direction in this regard was issued by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate court, (Economic offences) court, Ernakulam, N V Raju, while dismissing the petition of Saritha's advocate Fenny Balakrishnan, to permit him to record her statement and obtain her signature.
The court directed the Jail superintendent to permit Saritha
make her own complaint, if any in writing, forward the same to the court concerned and file a compliance report by July 31.

It noted that Saritha is educated and could write her own complaint on commission of offences, if any, committed against her. No complaint is seen to have been made by her against anybody else before she was arrested, the court said.
Saritha had been produced in court on July 20 when she had told the judge that she wanted to say something incamera.

"Rumours had spread that the court had recorded the statements of the accused on the facts of the case and she had revealed the names of cabinet ministers in the state and the court had further prohibited dissemination of the said facts', the court said.

In view of many in the state, this court was holding some 'confidential information' on the facts of the case. 'There is no confidentiality in the proceedings of the court. Whatever that have taken place, will be placed on record and will be available to scrutiny of the public', the judge held.
Slamming some media reports with regard to the case as 'only a bundle of lies', the court said when a woman accused produced from police custody submits to the court that she has to say something incamera, the court will permit the same as it has a duty to protect the rights of the accused in custody.

Saritha had not made any complaint of harassment in police custody in the open court. When it was pointed out that she perceived a threat to her life, she was assured that she need not worry about it and it would be in interest of the concerned to take care of her life. Her attempt to speak about the facts of the case was not permitted, the court said.
'The accused was politely informed that the court cannot hear the accused as regards the facts of the case (during investigation). She was informed that she is at liberty to file her complaint, if any, in writing'.

"The sequence of events and false propaganda unleashed by 'interested persons' in this case will indicate there was a 'grand design' to implicate some persons holding responsible positions in the Government, the court said.