Friday, April 10, 2009


K. Premkumar is now posted as the SP of Kancheepuram and is put in charge of the Sankaramanan, murder case. One can remember the appointment of a policeman Sunil in Kerala, for investigating the sex racket run by the Muslim league minister, 'Ice cream Kunjalikutty', in Kerala. Sunil himself was involved in three sex rackets and entrusting such a case with Sunil was like giving the key to the thief. The list of VIPs who raped the Kiliroor sex victim as told in her death declaration did not find in the list of documents Sunil submitted to the court. Like wise appointing Premkumar who has two prosecutions for torture and criminal assaults against him is more looking like that Jayalalitha is trying to manufacture evidence by torture, and the Sankararaman murder could have some connection to Premkumar himself. The prosecution recommended against Premkumar by the Director General of Police is pending with Jayalalitha since last year. .
Within a few years of having joined the service, Prem Kumar was named in a series of criminal cases. In one case he has even been convicted, but he appealed against the court verdict. In Tamil Nadu Prem Kumar is known as K. Premkumar because of his reputation for drugging and threatening the accused. The 'disturbing' past record of this investigating officer includes campaigning for an AIADMK candidates.
Prem Kumar was suspended by the Chief Election Commissioner for campaigning for an AIADMK candidate during the 2004 Lok Sabha polls. But he was reinstated as SP, Cuddalore, after the polls. It is obvious that here is a man who can go to any extent to please a political party. Even now he is embroiled in many cases. This kind of record for K. Premkumar heading the investigation in the cases against the Sankaracharya, shows that investigation into the murder case is a conspiracy and that a false case has been fabricated against Kanchi Sankaracharya Jayendra Saraswathi.
Mr K. Premkumar has no regard for law or truth. The role played by the police officers in this case would prove that this officer has behaved like barbarians without giving any respect to human dignity, that too with the ladies.
“It would be shameful to find that a person like the K Premkumar has been allowed to work in the police department.’’
From the time he was a sub-inspector in Madurai in the eighties, through his days as Deputy Superintendent of Police to the late nineties when he was promoted to the post of Superintendent of Police, Premkumar has had little patience for the rulebook and his high-handedness has shocked his superiors time and again, say insiders.
His beginnings were appropriately ominous. When he was only a sub-inspector in Vadipatti in Madurai district he took upon himself the job of evicting a tenant of a fellow policeman. The ex-serviceman tenant, Nallakaman, only wanted the advance of Rs 5,000 he had made returned.
The money was not coming and so Nallakaman decided to dig in his heels. But he had failed to take into account Premkumar’s interest in the case and had to pay for his costly mistake.
On February 1, 1982 Nallakaman, his wife and son were beaten up at the Vadipatti police station by Premkumar and his colleagues. The head of the family was then handcuffed and paraded in the streets and dragged to the Vadipatti bus stand.
To top it all, a criminal case was registered against the hapless Nallakaman on charges, including attempt to murder. Public outcry followed, an RDO inquiry was ordered and the report confirmed all the allegations.
Finally, the Usilampatti RDO filed a criminal complaint against Premkumar and three others. Premkumar himself was placed under suspension.
Meantime, the case filed against Nallakaman, the one filed by the RDO against Premkumar and a private complaint preferred by Nallakaman himself dragged on in the Madurai District Sessions Court.
Interestingly, Premkumar took the Group-I services examination during the period, emerged successful and was appointed Deputy Superintendent of Police.
At one stage, he was also successful in having the Madurai proceedings quashed by the Madras High Court, but the Supreme Court reversed the ruling and directed that all the three cases be tried together and disposed of by March 31, 1995.
Premkumar moved up the ladder fast, nevertheless. As Superintendent of Police, he was perhaps unhappy that he should be bothered by the likes of Nallakaman and moved the Madras High Court to quash the proceedings against him, but it was his petition that was dismissed with costs.
While Premkumar had alleged that Nallakaman was stalling the trial, Justice Karpagavinayagam held that the cases had indeed been stalled by Premkumar and the other accused policemen and that the officer had shown disrespect to the Supreme Court and the High Court.
The judge noted that the Madurai court had issued as many as 13 non-bailable warrants against Premkumar between September 1995 and March 2000, but none of them was executed.
The judge also expressed dismay that the police officer should have ‘‘disrobed the saree of the woman teacher (Nallakaman’s wife) at the police station and attempted to remove her thali (mangalya sutra).’’
The judge went on to wonder how Premkumar came to be promoted so rapidly when his first appointment as DSP itself was temporary and subject to the issue of the Madurai trial. But Premkumar seems to be having the last laugh now, emerging as a dashing officer who does not flinch before the might of a prestigious mutt.
If in June 2002, Justice Karpagavinayagam was appalled by what Premkumar had done as a sub-inspector at Vadipatti, more revelations were to follow barely four months later.
A prist of Marthandam in Kanyakumari district and a key accused in the Gilbert Raj murder case, moved the High Court against the brutal treatment meted out to him and two other co-accused, Sister Wiselin Femina Rose and Sister Sahayarani Jeyamary. The priest had been brutally beaten up and the sisters stripped and molested by Premkumar and another DSP Panneerselvam.
Directing a CB-CID inquiry into the allegations, the judge recorded in ghastly detail the testimonies of the two sisters: ‘‘Premkumar, DSP, came near Sahayarani and removed her saree and petticoat and threw them at the corner of the room. Then he also tore the blouse and pulled her breasts.
Premkumar, DSP, took his lathi and fisted on her stomach as well as on her private parts. At the same time, Panneerselvam, DSP, similarly removed the saree of Femina Rose.
After tearing the blouse, he pulled her breast and fisted on the chest with lathi. Joseph John and Gnanakan, father of Femina Rose (who were also present) prostrated before Premkumar, DSP, and Panneerselvam, DSP, requesting them not to outrage the modesty of the ladies. They also said that they would give any statement as they dictated...’’
Premkumar was pardoned under the Probationary Offenders Act in the Nallakaman case by the Madurai Sessions Court, in effect holding him guilty. But in the Kanyakumari case, no attempts seem to have been made by the CB-CID to launch prosecution against him despite a division Bench of the High Court and the Supreme Court upholding the single judge’s order.
To see all articles of writer visit

No comments:

Post a Comment