THRISSUR: The present or the previous government had not issued a specific order for the senior standing counsel who argued the Soumya rape-murder case in Supreme Court to consult A. Suresan, the special public prosecutor (SPP) who ensured convict Govindachami a death sentence. The lawyer had successfully presented the case in the fast-track court here in 2011 and later when the convict's review petition came up in the High Court in 2013. The UDF government's’ order in February 2015 said he was ‘engaged’ to assist the standing counsel in SC, but it was not an appointment order.
“I had taken up the matter with DySP Radhakrishnan Nair and CI Sasidharan who had investigated the case," he told DC. “They, through ADGP B. Sandhya, who supervised the investigation, sought a more specific order so that both the SPP and the investigating officers could hold detailed discussions with the standing counsel to effectively argue the case.” A month before the hearing of the case, the SC issued a notification regarding it and the senior counsel, and the LDF government did not issue orders for the proper involvement of SPP or the officers. “It is true that Nishe Rajan Shonker, a standing counsel, had called a few times regarding some doubts, and I was informed that there were no issues with the case in SC. But, neither law minister A. K. Balan or the standing counsel Thomas P. Joseph talked to me,” he added.
Evidence and eyewitnesses Mr Suresan said as there were no eyewitnesses for Govindachami throwing the victim out of the moving train, pieces of evidence were presented scientifically and through the forensic report. Ms Soumya fell several feet away from the railway track on her face and lost most of her teeth. If she had voluntarily jumped off the train, she should fall on her hands and legs near the track. Govindachamy who jumped from the train did not suffer any serious injuries.
