Thiruvananthapuram: Controversial magistrate N.V. Raju gave a contradictory statement before the High Court registrar that solar fraud accused Saritha S. Nair mentioned two names during her confession but claimed that he did not properly hear it.
However, according to registrar Anil Kumar, who recorded Saritha's statement at the Women's jail at Attakulangara, Saritha specifically stated that she had not mentioned any names to the magistrate, it is learnt.
The revelations came in the vigilance inquiry report regarding the allegations made by K.Surendran of BJP and A. Jayasankar, general secretary of the Indian Association of Lawyers.
The vigilance probe report by the registrar also stated that when Saritha had a specific case that she was subjected to rape by somebody, instead of permitting her to submit a written complaint on that day itself, the magistrate was not justified in sending her back to the jail.
Registrar Anil Kumar, who is dealing with the subordinate judiciary, made it clear that since the magistrate was not expected to anticipate the request of Saritha for confidential hearing and as the entire transaction had taken place during the pre-lunch session itself, one cannot even imagine that the refusal on the part of the magistrate to record the statement of Saritha was on account of any kind of influence, and that too through mobile phone.
The registrar also ruled out any possibility of calling for the mobile phone records of the magistrate, who allowed Saritha to confess during the hearing of a case on July 20. The complainants had alleged that the magistrate recorded the statement and destroyed the same.
