Kannur ADM death: Court will rule on PP Divya’s bail plea on November 8

PP Divya (file) | Photo credit: SK Mohan

The Thalassery Sessions Court in Kannur on Tuesday (November 5, 2024) reserved its judgment in the case bail application of PP Divya, former president of district panchayatwho is accused of abetting the suicide of Kannur Additional District Magistrate (ADM) K. Naveen Babu. After extensive arguments from Ms Divya’s defense team, the prosecution and Naveen Babu’s family, the court announced that it will deliver judgment on Friday (November 8, 2024).

During Tuesday’s hearing, Ms Divya’s lawyer, Advocate K. Viswan, argued that there is no clear evidence of intent to abet suicide in the case. He alleged that Naveen Babu had allegedly accepted bribe in the presence of government official Prashanth, who was earlier suspended on disciplinary grounds for bribery.

The defense claimed that there is circumstantial evidence linking Prashanth’s actions to bribery allegations, suggesting that ADM and Prashanth communicated several times over the phone and later met at a hotel, where CCTV footage allegedly captured their meeting. The defense asked the court to obtain these images and review the telephone conversations as evidence of ADM’s alleged misconduct.

The defense also presented evidence that Prashanth had taken out a gold loan, suggesting it could be linked to bribe payments.

‘Claims speculative’

In response, public prosecutor K. Ajithkumar dismissed the defense claims as speculative. They challenged the credibility of phone calls as evidence of bribery, stressing that Prashanth Naveen’s disciplinary charges did not directly implicate Babu in corrupt dealings.

It was further highlighted that Naveen Babu, who had entered government service at the age of 19, had an impeccable record with no previous allegations of bribery or misconduct. The prosecutor argued that if the court granted bail to Ms Divya, it could influence witnesses and hamper the ongoing investigation.

Naveen Babu’s family expressed dissatisfaction over the handling of the case and alleged that the police had failed to arrest Ms. Divya immediately and had failed to record the statement of Naveen Babu’s wife Manjusha, who was in court was represented by attorney John S. Rauf.

The family’s legal counsel argued that Ms. Divya had evaded two separate subpoenas and delayed cooperation with the investigation.

Possible conspiracy

The family’s counsel also suggested a possible conspiracy and urged the court to examine the phone records between Ms Divya and the Kannur District Collector. He alleged that Ms. Divya’s actions in delaying approval of files and allegations of accepting bribes by ADM could be part of a larger scheme that warrants a deeper investigation.

On October 29, the court rejected Ms Divya’s anticipatory bail application, resulting in her arrest by the investigation team.