Sunday, January 16 2005 17:39 Hrs (IST) - World Time -

Chennai: Firmly ruling out withdrawal of cases against the Kanchi Seer Jayendra Saraswathi, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa today (Jan 16, 2005) charged the BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party), which has demanded withdrawal of the cases, with taking up the issue "to rehabilitate their party."

In a seven-page statement, Jayalalithaa said "I cannot yield to their request contrary to the law of the land, especially when I have taken an oath under the Constitution which is of a secular nature."

She said the stand of the BJP and "certain other vested interests" that she should "intervene" with the investigation process was "purely politically motivated and their expectations are contrary to the rule of law."

"Adherents of the BJP think that religious leaders are above law and no investigation can be conducted against them. It is for the public to think and judge whether their view is right or not. BJP may be interested in taking up this issue in their programme to rehabilitate their party," she said.

"No one wished and expected that the heads of the Shankara Mutt, established to uphold Hindu Dharma, would stray from the path of dharma and doctrines of Shastras to be arraigned as accused in a murder case. At the same time, when all the evidence clearly pointed towards them in the commission of such a crime, that could not be ignored," she said.

Jayalalithaa said investigation of the Sankararaman murder case was being conducted by the appropriate officers. When the investigation was taking place, even the judiciary could not intervene in the matter. "It is their statutory right. How is it possible legally for me to interfere or intervene in the matter. Also, I have no necessity to do that," she said.

When this was the position, adherents of the BJP were asking her to withdraw the case and also to apologise for whatever had taken place so far and were talking in such a fashion from platforms, she said.

"It is painful to note that such requests are being made by persons, who had earlier administered the country. When an investigation is in progress in a murder case, how is it possible that the case be withdrawn," she asked.

It was a fundamental principle of law that an investigation stood apart and was beyond personal likes and dislikes of a Chief Minister. "It is amazing how this elementary principle is not known to those making this demand," she said.

"Even without knowing the basic principle of investigation in a murder case, they have chosen to drag my name into the investigation process purely out of animosity towards me. They should at least now realise this and desist from such scurrilous attacks. When the law empowers the investigation officers to have the necessary and essential power to investigate, how can a Chief Minister interfere in it one way or the other?" she asked.

Jayalalithaa said with the progress of investigation, a situation arose wherein the arrest of the Seer became inevitable. That law must take its own course required no specific directions or orders, she said.

She said the Sankararaman murder and the assault of Radhakrishnan and Madhavan posed a severe challenge to the police.

As the investigations were being carried on, answers to several intriguing questions unfolded, revealing certain shocking facts. "It pointed to the involvement of certain personages, who could never have been suspected of involvement in such crimes. When these names were brought to my knowledge, it came as a rude shock to me," she said.

The primary duty and responsibility of the investigation of the crime was cast solely on the investigation officer, she said adding "as Chief Minister and as the Minister in charge of Home portfolio, the facts of such cases are brought to my notice only to minimum extent and that too only in the context and for the purpose of maintenance of law and order and public order. The details of investigation were not revealed to me nor was I interested in knowing about these."

"In the entire episode, I have acted without fear or favour. These three cases point to the fact that the three persons, who were victims of the assaults, had at some point of time connections with the Kanchi Sankara Mutt. This will raise the relevant questions as to why all the three persons should have been assaulted or murdered," she said.

Jayalalithaa said Sankararaman's murder was not an ordinary incident.

"It is a murder, a brutal murder of an orthodox temple manager, committed by hirelings, in broad daylight within the temple premises. Should this be left un-investigated. Is it their view that hired assassins and conspirators should be allowed to go scot-free. Should those involved in the perpetration of this murder be shown mercy and allowed to go without any action taken against them under the law," she asked.

In the maintenance of law and order, one could not discriminate between friend and foe, poor and rich, religious head and atheist, she said.

"There have been crimes committed by persons and leaders of various faiths and religious denominations in the past, who have been arraigned in courts of law, but on these occasions, there were no premeditated side-tracking conclusions or tutored or monitored 'public views'," she said.

But in the arrest of the Seer, even as the investigation was in progress, various pressure groups and interests had been actively manipulating the media to spread misinformation about the case, she said.

Jayalalithaa said guilt or innocence could be established only when the full-fledged trial took place in the court and until then, all the previous stages up to the stage of filing chargesheet formed part of investigation.

At this stage, there was no room for speculation as to whether this or that fact or document established the crime and whether the evidence so gathered was enough to prove the crime, she said adding, "such an evaluation is possible only when the full-fledged trial itself takes place, which is rightfully the task and duty of the court."