Sarmokadam was produced in the court of special judge K R Warrier who held that the police should be given time to carry out investigation in the case which claimed 74 lives.
Appearing on behalf of Sarmokdam, advocate Vijay Sali referred to the ruling in the case of L K Advani vs CBI reported in 2559/SC 1997 wherein it was held that the noting in a diary could not be taken as proof in any graft case.
Countering his argument, public prosecutor Hemlata Deshmukh submitted that though the accused was not the DMC when the building was constructed, the foundation of the building was laid when he was the DMC of the Zone.
She said that from the notings in the diary, it was certain that the accused had accepted an illegal gratification from the builder to the tune of Rs 50,000 for turning a blind eye to the construction.
The judge ordered that the police should be allowed time to carry out investigation and remanded the accused to the police custody upto May 4.
The police had not filed their reply to the bail plea and submitted that they would file their reply on May 4 when the matter will come up for further hearing.
