The Supreme Court, hearing a bail petition from Kanchi Shankaracharya in the Sankararaman murder case, has asked the Tamil Nadu government to 'pin-point' evidence linking him to the crime.
A Bench, comprising Chief Justice R C Lahoti, Justice G P Mathur and P P Naolekar, said this after hearing Shankaracharya's counsel Fali S Nariman's argument. Nariman pointed out 'contradictions' in the evidence cited against the seer by the Tamil Nadu police.
The Bench asked prosecution counsel K T S Tulsi to 'pin-point the evidence against the accused without dwelling too much into the motive behind the crime'.
Nariman contended that the prosecution theory that the Kanchi Mutt had drawn huge amount of money from the ICICI Bank in Kanchipuram at the behest of the seer for payment to the assailants of Sankararaman was nothing but a figment of imagination of the police.
He said no money was ever withdrawn from the bank. Realising this, the prosecution was now saying that the money, amounting to Rs 50 lakh, was obtained from the sale of land.
Nariman said the amount could not have been paid to the assailants in September, as a Mutt manager had stated before a court that the money received from the sale of land had been deposited in a bank in May 2004, much before the murder of Sankararaman on September 3.
Tulsi, in support of his argument, cited 39 letters written by Sankararaman 'exposing' the 'maladministration at the Mutt and the illegal activity of the Shankaracharya' and said this continuous campaign by him was the reason behind the seer hatching a conspiracy to eliminate him.
The Bench took objection when Tulsi dwelled deep into the contents of the letter, some of it touching upon the alleged immoral activities of the seer. It asked: "Has the prosecution found any evidence to that regard or just citing wild allegations levelled by a rank outsider?"
Nariman said the prosecution was relying too much on the 'so-called' confessional statements of the arrested without realising that much importance could not be attached to statements from co-accused. The prosecution had to first find evidence against the pontiff.
He alleged there had been a systematic attempt to fabricate evidence after the Supreme Court issued notice on the bail plea on December 17.
Refuting the allegations, Tulsi said the case hinged on the conspiracy theory and the prosecution had at least two direct witnesses to the conspiracy hatched by the Shankaracharya and the two other accused, Appu and Kadiravan, along with others, to eliminate Sankararaman.
He claimed that the seer would have fled the country had the police not taken prompt action. There was a detailed flight plan and even a helicopter was kept ready for the Shankaracharya, he said. He, however, did not disclose where the seer intended to proceed to.
Opposing the grant of bail, Tulsi said most witnesses in the case were employees of the Kanchipuram Mutt. If the seer was enlarged on bail, these witnesses would not be in a position to depose against him.
He accused the seer of tampering with evidence and also attempting to "dislodge and misdirect" the investigation by engineering surrender of five people not connected with the crime so that none could point fingers at him.