THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The action recommended by Justice Shivarajan Commission against members of special investigation team (SIT) that probed the solar scam comes in direct contrast with the pats they had received from the courts earlier. It has also triggered widespread resentment as most of the officers who now faced actions have had unblemished track records. A Pathanamthitta court, in its verdict, in one of the solar cheating case pertaining to one EK Baburajan of Aranamula had termed that the investigating officer B. Prasannan Nair, who was a member of the SIT, conducted a fair and foolproof investigation.
Another victim had opposed the plea in the High Court seeking CBI probe into the scam saying that he was satisfied by the probe conducted by DySP K. Harikrishnan, another member of the SIT. The team had completed investigation in 33 cases in about six months and successfully prosecuted the accused in two cases while the others are in various stages of trial. The courts which perused case diaries on various occasions not only passed no adverse remarks but expressed satisfaction over the probe. Based on the the judicial commission recommendations, the government has since transferred DGP (crime) A. Hemachandran, who headed the SIT, as KSRTC chairman and managing director.
The investigation team members superintendents of police (traffic south-zone) V. Ajith has been shifted to the anti-terrorist force and Reji Jacob (crime branch analysis wing) as assistant director of Kerala Police Academy, K.S. Sudarsanan (crime branch Ernakulam) to crime branch analysis wing, DySP (Malappuram DCRB) Jaison K Abraham to DCRB Kasargod, Mala circle inspector B. Roy to crime branch economic offence wing in Pathanamthitta and sub-inspector Biju John of crime branch Ernakulam unit to crime branch Kasargod unit.
It has also been pointed out that the high court had given former chief minister Oommen Chandy a clean chit in the case pertaining to Konni-based businessman Kallelil Sreedharan Nair. “Saritha Nair might have business interests, but there is nothing to prove that Chandy had a role in the matter, or that he did anything wrong. There is nothing to implicate him, and there is no evidence against him,” the High Court order in October 2013 said. Hence there was no scope for arraigning Mr. Chandy in the case, police sources pointed out.
