Hooch case: witness turns hostile

By Our Staff Reporter

KOLLAM, JULY 24. Thankaraj, charge witness number 186, who was summoned by the Prosecution to the witness box today to testify in the Kalluvathukkal-Pallikkal-Pallipuram hooch tragedy case, turned hostile. However, his account of events given in the testification was patently inconsistent.

This is the first instance since the start of the trial of this case where a witness has turned hostile. In all, 47 witnesses were summoned to the witness box and except for Thankaraj, the remaining 46 were declared Prosecution witnesses. Thankaraj was not examined by any of the counsels from the defence.

The witness turned hostile right at the start of the chief examination by the Special Prosecutor, Mr. V. Sugathan. The Prosecution then asked permission from the court to cross examine the witness. It was during the cross examination that the witness made self contradictory statements.

According to the case of the Prosecution, it was Thankaraj who constructed all the five secret cellars for Manichan to stash away the spirit. It was from one of these cellars located under a hollow bricks unit of Manichan at Kunthallur, near Chirayinkeezhu, that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) which probed the case had seized 90,000 litres of spirit on November 19 last and the same had led to Manichan's arrest in connection with the case. The witness denied any knowledge about these cellars during the cross examination.

While at the start of the chief examination, Thankaraj told the Judge, Mr. A. Dennison, that he had never been to a school, during cross examination Thankaraj admitted that he had been to a school at Parasala and studied up to Std-III.

He further told the Court that he had last seen Manichan four years ago while working as a helper under a mason, Thankappan, during the construction of Manichan's bungalow at Kunthallur. He said that after that, he had seen Manichan only today in the court. However, in the cross examination, the witness admitted that he was invited for Manichan's daughter's wedding and that he had attended the nuptial ceremony.

He made this admission when the Prosecution pointed out that there were video clippings of his at the ceremony. The witness then told the court that his testification earlier that he had last seen Manichan four years ago was a mistake. He, however, said that it was Thankappan who invited him for the wedding. At this point, the Prosecution pointed out that Thankappan had died two years prior to the wedding. But Thankaraj countered by stating that he had seen Thankappan even a year ago.

Again the witness stated that except for Manichan, he had not seen any of Manichan's family members or other associates. But, later he said that he had several times seen Manichan's wife, Usha, who figures as accused no. 18 in the case. Thankaraj told the court that during the three months while working at the construction site for Manichan's bungalow, he used to return back to his house at Parasala every evening and report back for duty at 8 a.m. the next day.

Despite traveling to the construction site every day for three months, as per his version, the witness said that he does not remember the way to the site now. He also said that while there was no wall around the compound and that the compound was fully opened, there was a gate. When cross examined for details about the gate, he said the gates were attached to two iron pillars.

When the Prosecution read out portions from the statements he had reportedly given to the SIT during the course of the probe and mentioned that these were contradictory to his testification, he said that while some of those statements were never given by him, he did make some of them under threats from the SIT. The Prosecution was assisted by the Additional Prosecutor, Mr. G. Mohan Raj.

The witness also told the court that he had learnt about the hooch tragedy and Manichan's arrest in this connection only today.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Southern States
Previous : Question mark over acquired forest lands
Next     : Sri Lankan national seeks assistance