Kerala HC says difficult to prove Antony Raju intended to tamper with evidence

Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Friday observed that it would be difficult to prove that former state Transport Minister Antony Raju intended to tamper with evidence in a 1990 drug case when he was a junior lawyer.

Justice C Jayachandran also asked whether Raju’s senior lawyer at the time was aware of the alleged evidence tampering. The observations came while hearing Raju’s plea seeking suspension of his conviction so that he can contest the upcoming Assembly polls.

Court raises questions on intent and liability

During the hearing, the court asked how criminal liability could be fastened on Raju in the circumstances, a senior government lawyer said.

The judge also questioned how any motive or intention to tamper with evidence could be attributed to him.

The prosecution, however, argued that the evidence had been tampered with when it was in Raju’s custody.

The High Court’s observations came as it considered Raju’s plea to suspend his conviction for evidence tampering.

State opposes relief citing electoral integrity

The state government opposed the plea, arguing that the former minister “has failed to demonstrate any grave injustice or irreparable damage that would occur if the conviction is allowed to operate.”

It further told the court that granting him the relief “would undermine the integrity of the electoral process.”

After hearing arguments from both sides, the High Court reserved its order on the plea by Raju, a leader of the Janadhipathya Kerala Congress, a constituent of the CPI(M)-led LDF in Kerala.

Raju approached the High Court after the Thiruvananthapuram District and Sessions Court declined to suspend his conviction.

Conviction, disqualification and legal arguments

Raju was sentenced to three years’ simple imprisonment by the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I Court, Nedumangad, in a case related to tampering with evidence while appearing as a lawyer for an Australian national arrested in a drug case in 1990.

Following his conviction, the Kerala Legislative Assembly Secretariat issued a notification confirming his disqualification.

In his plea before the High Court, Raju said the application to suspend the conviction was filed because, as a sitting member of the Kerala Legislative Assembly, he stood disqualified from holding office solely due to the conviction.

According to him, unlike a sentence of imprisonment, the disqualification under Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act is self-operating and instantaneous, leaving no scope for restitution unless the conviction itself is suspended.

“The petitioner's right to contest the upcoming general election to the state legislative Assembly is put in peril due to the conviction imposed on him via the judgment impugned in the criminal appeal, which is indefensible both on facts and law,” the petition said.

Raju has also contended that the conviction and sentence passed by the magistrate court were against the law, facts and evidence, and alleged that the court had committed grave errors in appreciating the evidence.

“The sentence passed by the court below is excessive and has not taken into consideration the delay of 35 years. The sentence was passed only to disqualify the petitioner under the Representation of the People Act,” the petition said.