Thiruvananthapuram : NIA court verdict crumbled Union Deputy Minister V Muraleedharan’s claim that the smuggled gold was a private baggage. The judicial clarification negating that came in ruling over bail applications submitted by 10 persons charged under UAPA in the case. The verdict mentions ‘diplomatic baggage’ to describe the smuggled gold at 8 places in the document.
Soon after customs intercepted the smuggled gold at airport and news surrounding it snowballed, V Muraleedharan insisted the contraband was private rather than diplomatic baggage. Curiously, he stuck to that claim for a long while even though various agencies that probed the cache, pointed in the opposite direction.
In black and white, the NIA court has now endorsed what authorities held good all this while - that the gold smuggled into Thiruvananthapuram airport and intercepted on 5 June by Customs officials, indeed came packed in diplomatic baggage of the UAE Consulate. The statement to this effect can be found in paragraph no. 2,4,7,14,15,17,19 and 20 of the verdict.
NIA in its argument justified UAPA charges on culprits saying the smuggled gold was meant to fund terror and quake the country’s. economic stability. However, the court in its verdict pointed out that, there exists no evidence on that count and that evidences up to now suggested only profiteering as the motive.
UAPA charges hold good only if corresponding chargesheets are drawn within 180 days. In this case however, the accused obtained their bail merely 6 days of registering the case. The occurrence is extraordinary and happened because there existed no evidence pointing to UAPA offence. All these in turn taint the credibility of investigations undertaken by NIA, the court observed.
