HC dismisses petition by former DMK minister seeking copies of

The Madras High Court today dismissed a petition filed by former DMK Minister I Periyasamy seeking a copy of statements of witnesses that helped the Vigilance file a disproportionate assets case against him, saying that the case diary submitted by DVAC did not contain it.
Justice S Nagamuthu said he was shocked to know that the former minister had received the confidential report of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption which said many statements had been recorded on the inquiry, conducted in connection with the case, sent by some persons from a bogus address at Triplicane area in Chennai.

As per procedure, the statements were recorded before DVAC decided to file the case and they formed part of prima facie evidence for filing the case.
The judge recorded the submission of the Superintendent of Police who said that the report had been leaked with the connivance of some officials.
Justice Nagamuthu regretted the sorry state of affairs and said "I hope the department will learn a lesson from this episode and plug the loopholes."
Periyasamy produced a copy of DVAC's internal report on statements recorded by it and sought to provide him copies of statements recorded from 43 witnesses. It was then that the judge wanted to know how an internal communication was leaked.

The petitioner's counsel said his client had received it by post on June 10 from one I Balasubramani of Triplicane, Chennai.

The judge ordered an inquiry by G Venkataraman, Director (in-charge), DVAC, who, in turn, reported that it should be probed in detail through registration of a criminal case.
The Director said appropriate instructions had been issued to the confidential branch of DVAC and its detachments on handling courier items.
The judge also pointed to a number of inconsistencies in DVAC's stand on availability of the statements of witnesses.
DVAC was now claiming that only oral inquiries were made. Besides, the case diary produced before court did not contain the statements, the judge said, adding it would not be possible to direct DVAC to issue copies to the petitioner.