|
- by Parinda Bureau, January 28, 2006, 12:34 IST
Daya Nayak, encounter specialist has been freed until the next court hearing which takes place Monday.
The Special Anti-Corruption Bureau court Judge S P Mahajan on Friday have asked the police not to arrest the suspended police sub-inspector, his wife Komal and associate Rajendra Padte till January 30, the next date of the hearing.
The defence argued that in this case, no custodial interrogation was required, stating that the defendants had been cooperating with the investigating officials.
The prosecution also said that Mani Vellam and Rajendra Padte were merely puppets of Nayak, who did not have any independent business but were rotating Nayak's black money by running various companies and a bhishi.
The proceedings in Mahajan's court droned on as the prosecution's reply to the defence arguments on anticipatory bail applications could not be completed.
Public Prosecutor R V Kini in his reply claimed before the court that during the four previous inquiries of Nayak, as per MCOCA court directives, the findings were unsatisfactory and no clean chit was ever given to Daya.
Kini said the ACB had to go in for verification of the facts before filing the FIR against him on January 20. Though Nayak had also presented himself before the ACB on two occasions, his replies to ACB questions with regard to the wealth he gathered during the short period in the service were not digestible.
Kini said in 1995, Komal entered into an agreement with Deve Paints where she was working as a director for the purchase of a flat worth Rs 47 lakh. However, the price of the Bah-dra flat was shown as just Rs 10.05. Kini said that a deed of confirmation of the sale of the flat was executed in 2001 in the name Komal Daya Nayak after a cheque payment of Rs 10.05 lakh. But the agreement was made in 1995 in the name of Komal Bhaskar Rao.
The prosecution's main contention was: why was the agreement executed after almost six years.
The defence had earlier claimed that the company had given the flat to Komal in 1994 as a director. Later, when the company became sick, it offered her the flat on ownership for which a sale agreement was signed in 1995. It was also pointed out by the defence that Komal had and independent source of income, since she had been working since 1989 as a private secretary, officer and later the director of the company.
| 
