Thiruvananthapuram: In a setback to Chief Minister Oommen Chandy, a local court here on Friday rejected his plea to restrain Opposition Leader V.S. Achuthanandan from making ‘baseless allegations’ during electioneering and even warned Mr. Chandy’s counsel from making the court a venue for politics.
Mr. Achuthanandan’s counsel presented a list of 12 cases involving Mr. Chandy and stated that the Opposition Leader stood by the allegations raised by him. He sought more time for presenting the defence arguments, considering which the court posted the case to May 12.
On Thursday, Mr. Chandy had filed a civil suit for compensation against Mr. Achuthanandan in connection with the latter's statement during election campaigns that there were 31 corruption cases against Mr. Chandy and 131 cases against the entire cabinet.
Rejecting the plea for interim order, the additional district judge K.P. Indira cited that any interim order at this stage may affect the republican form of political system of state as the election was scheduled to be held on May 16.
Mr. Achuthanandan’s counsel, Cheriniyoor Sasidharan, said that prima facie there were documents to support the statement of Mr Achuthanandan that the chief minister and other ministers were involved in many cases. He also produced a list of 12 cases pending against Mr. Chandy at the Lok Ayukta.
Mr. Chandy’s counsel A. Santosh Kumar sought the interim order to restrain Mr. Achuthanandan citing that the latter was raising baseless allegations in view of the elections. Subsequently, the court maintained that the court shall not be made a venue for politics.
Mr Achuthanandan’s counsel later told reporters that VS had made the statements against Mr. Chandy with a firm conviction and that he would stick to it. He also said that there were even sufficient pieces of evidence, including RTI documents, to support the statements. “More time for defending the case was sought as Mr. Achuthanandan was quite busy with electioneering,” he said. Advocate S. Chandrasekharan also appeared for Mr. Achuthanandan in the case.
