Thiagarajan on October 27, 2017 that “he was totally in the dark as to the purpose for which the batteries were purchased was not recorded by me, because it would have been an exculpatory statement and hence the whole purpose of recording the confessional statement would be lost.A Bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and R. Banumathi issued notice to the CBI on the petition after counsel Gopal Sankaranarayanan said as the entire basis of the conviction in May 1999 was based on confession made by the accused under TADA, the verdict should be recalled.In that case, he said the very basis of the conviction under conspiracy couldn’t be sustained even without taking in to consideration any other further evidence. Thiagarajan referred to a wireless message of May 7, 1991 from mastermind Sivarasan to LTTE top operative ‘Pottu Amman’ in which the former said “our intention is not known to anybody except we three,” meaning himself, Subha and Dhanu, the suicide bomber.He said the only substantial overt act attributed to him was that of supplying two 9-volt Golden Power batteries, which was alleged to be used in the Improvised Explosive Device. He pointed out that though this Court held in May 1999 judgment that TADA act was not applicable to the facts of the case the matter was decided by this Court on the basis of alleged confession made before the police.Based on this status report from the CBI Perarivalan moved the present petition contending that the facts as it stands today show that the Petitioner was handed conviction by playing fraud on this court, which means in effect no judgment in the eyes of the law. He said a “mere act” of providing nine-volt batteries would not make Perarivalan privy to the conspiracy to kill Rajiv Gandhi.

The wireless message makes it clear that Perarivalan was not taken into confidence.”The court had asked the Centre and the CBI to file a reply to the affidavit filed by the then CBI investigating officer V. Thiagarajan said he had taken the considered decision to come forward before the Supreme Court to put the facts pertaining to the confessional statement recorded by me in the proper perspective so as to facilitate this court to render justice. Hence he prayed for recall of the judgment, which would enable him to prove his innocence. Thiagarajan that the CBI omitted that part of Perarivalan’s confession that he was not aware of the purpose for which he supplied the two nine volt batteries. On Tuesday the court had asked the Centre to reply in three months its stand on Tamil nadu’s proposal to grant remission and release all the seven life convicts in the case. It is pertinent to mention that the CBI (MDMA) is yet to conclude its investigation pertaining to the above said origin and make of the Improvised Explosive Device. relation to the origin and make of the Improvised Explosive device as that would through much light https://www.guyueholding.com/product/motorcycle-battery/ in to the larger conspiracy. The Bench posted the matter for further hearing on February 21.Mr.”In its response the CBI said a Letter Rogatory was sent to Sri Lanka on the probe to find out whether the bomb used in the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi was made in Sri Lanka and so far there has been no response from the Sri Lankan government.

Thiagarajan that the CBI omitted that part of Perarivalan’s confession that he was not aware of the purpose for which he supplied the two nine volt batteries. The CBI internal evidence shows that even if providing of the 9-volt batteries were true, the knowledge of the conspiracy cannot be attributed to the petitioner. He also quoted the affidavit of the investigating officer V.New Delhi: In a new twist in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, the Supreme Court on Wednesday sought the response of the CBI to a petition filed by Perarivalan, one of the convicts in the case seeking recall of the May 1999 verdict, which he alleged was obtained by “fraud” by the investigating agency by suppressing facts..Mr.Perarivalan quoted an affidavit filed by the CBI investigating officer V. The court had earlier agreed to examine whether Perarivalan, life convict in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case can be released on the basis of new evidence which has come to light—whether the two batteries supplied by him were the ones used in the “belt bomb

Thiagarajan on October 27, 2017 that “he was totally in the dark as to the purpose for which the batteries were purchased was not recorded by me, because it would have been an exculpatory statement and hence the whole purpose of recording the confessional statement would be lost.A Bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and R. Banumathi issued notice to the CBI on the petition after counsel Gopal Sankaranarayanan said as the entire basis of the conviction in May 1999 was based on confession made by the accused under TADA, the verdict should be recalled.In that case, he said the very basis of the conviction under conspiracy couldn’t be sustained even without taking in to consideration any other further evidence. Thiagarajan referred to a wireless message of May 7, 1991 from mastermind Sivarasan to LTTE top operative ‘Pottu Amman’ in which the former said “our intention is not known to anybody except we three,” meaning himself, Subha and Dhanu, the suicide bomber.He said the only substantial overt act attributed to him was that of supplying two 9-volt Golden Power batteries, which was alleged to be used in the Improvised Explosive Device. He pointed out that though this Court held in May 1999 judgment that TADA act was not applicable to the facts of the case the matter was decided by this Court on the basis of alleged confession made before the police.Based on this status report from the CBI Perarivalan moved the present petition contending that the facts as it stands today show that the Petitioner was handed conviction by playing fraud on this court, which means in effect no judgment in the eyes of the law. He said a “mere act” of providing nine-volt batteries would not make Perarivalan privy to the conspiracy to kill Rajiv Gandhi.

The wireless message makes it clear that Perarivalan was not taken into confidence.”The court had asked the Centre and the CBI to file a reply to the affidavit filed by the then CBI investigating officer V. Thiagarajan said he had taken the considered decision to come forward before the Supreme Court to put the facts pertaining to the confessional statement recorded by me in the proper perspective so as to facilitate this court to render justice. Hence he prayed for recall of the judgment, which would enable him to prove his innocence. Thiagarajan that the CBI omitted that part of Perarivalan’s confession that he was not aware of the purpose for which he supplied the two nine volt batteries. On Tuesday the court had asked the Centre to reply in three months its stand on Tamil nadu’s proposal to grant remission and release all the seven life convicts in the case. It is pertinent to mention that the CBI (MDMA) is yet to conclude its investigation pertaining to the above said origin and make of the Improvised Explosive Device. relation to the origin and make of the Improvised Explosive device as that would through much light famous GEL batteries factory in to the larger conspiracy. The Bench posted the matter for further hearing on February 21.Mr.”In its response the CBI said a Letter Rogatory was sent to Sri Lanka on the probe to find out whether the bomb used in the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi was made in Sri Lanka and so far there has been no response from the Sri Lankan government.

Thiagarajan that the CBI omitted that part of Perarivalan’s confession that he was not aware of the purpose for which he supplied the two nine volt batteries. The CBI internal evidence shows that even if providing of the 9-volt batteries were true, the knowledge of the conspiracy cannot be attributed to the petitioner. He also quoted the affidavit of the investigating officer V.New Delhi: In a new twist in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, the Supreme Court on Wednesday sought the response of the CBI to a petition filed by Perarivalan, one of the convicts in the case seeking recall of the May 1999 verdict, which he alleged was obtained by “fraud” by the investigating agency by suppressing facts..Mr.Perarivalan quoted an affidavit filed by the CBI investigating officer V. The court had earlier agreed to examine whether Perarivalan, life convict in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case can be released on the basis of new evidence which has come to light—whether the two batteries supplied by him were the ones used in the “belt bomb

“I felt the ground beneath me was slipping. I set out for Bhopal on November 9 and went straight to the accident site. The car owner then produced a middle-aged man, who admitted before the police that he was the one driving the vehicle. How can the clippings disappear from the police control room I again got the footage retrieved and this time I made sure to keep a back-up.Ms Maurya had to also struggle to disprove the vehicle owner’s claim that he and his son were not in Bhopal when the incident took place.“I had made a few phone calls to Ayodhya Nagar police station and realised that the probe was going nowhere. She not only tracked down the car in the neighbouring town of Raisen but also traced its owner.

“I will fight it to the finish, even if it costs me my life,” a frail looking, but determined, Ms Maurya said.While the police dismissed it as death in a road accident, without pursuing the case for any headway, Ms Maurya took it upon herself to gather evidence against the unknown accused who had hit her son and then fled away from the scene. “I was deeply upset.“I got the pictures analysed and found that the photographs were taken at another time,” Ms Maurya said.Ms Maurya also produced a 14-second animated video that she had developed to recreate the crime scene. I know that nothing is ever deleted beyond recovery.

She has decided to live for a “sacred mission”-— to bring to book her son’s killer.”When the police told her that they were unable to identify the car from the footage, Ms Maurya retrieved a grainy image of the registration number of a car believed to be the one involved in the accident. Let the police give me the power to interrogate the people linked to the case and I will produce evidence to establish the motive,” said the mother who also accessed her son’s Facebook account to find possible conspiracy angle.

I ensured that it was retrieved,” Ms Maurya said.When she approached the police station for the CCTV footage, Ms Maurya was told that images captured from October 22 to November 9 had been deleted.The vehicle owner, a local advocate, argued that the damage was done after the car hit a pole.Ms Maurya went back to the accident site, visited an eatery located nearby, and returned with five witnesses, one of whom later testified before a magistrate.While her efforts have produced little progress in the investigation, they did result in transfer of two police officials and also of the case to another police station for a “fair probe”. But Ms Maurya produced CCTV footage to contest the assertion, showing someone “young and slim” to be in the driver’s seat. He had produced photographs to show that he was with a politician at the time of the accident.She last met Madhya Pradesh’s director general of police R. The vehicle had a dent in the bumper, which had been covered by stickers.

My instinct told me there must have been eye witnesses as there was a petrol pump and a Durga Puja pandal close to the spot.Having done her own investigation so far in the case, Ms Maurya now wants to interrogate the accused herself. Shukla on September 20 seeking justice.Aditya, an engineering student, died on October 22 last year, after being hit by a car while he was taking a stroll on the sidewalk with one of his friends at around 11 pm. I also spotted three CCTV cameras at the nearby square,” she told this newspaper narrating how she went about collecting evidence, which, she alleged, the police never did. It did not take long for Kismat Maurya (39) to figure out that a long and arduous battle lay before her when she first visited the Ayodhya Nagar police station on November 9, 2015, days after the last rites of her son Aditya Maurya (19) had been performed. “A murder case cannot be registered as the motive is not https://www.guyueholding.com/product/motorcycle-battery/gel-motorcycle-battery/ motorcycle gel batteries established,” local superintendent of police Anshuman Singh said.

But police was still waiting for “concrete evidence” to convert the case from an accident to that of a murder.The police, meanwhile, has said the case “lacks motive”. I am an MSc in computer science. The probe has progressed only because I toiled to gather evidence.A week later, she again approached the police station to learn that the video footage she had submitted had gone missing.She has decided to live for a “sacred mission”-— to bring to book her son’s killer. I walked up and down the road at least 30 times.“Police simply did nothing. Forensic tests later confirmed that the car had hit either a human body or cattle.