The allegations hurled by Swapna Suresh and top bureaucrat M. Sivasankar against each other in the gold smuggling case may not leave a direct impact on the outcome of cases pending against them as the facts revealed by the duo are already in the realm of the investigation agencies.
However, the Customs and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) could make use of Swapna’s media outbursts against Mr. Sivasankar to reinforce their case that he had prior knowledge about the gold smuggling activities using the diplomatic channel.
While the Customs and the ED had arraigned Swapna and Mr. Sivasankar as accused in the the cases, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) had left him out in the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) case while booking her along with a few others.
Swapna, according to an investigator, had revealed more explosive information in her confessional statements, than what she revealed to the media. Hence, the revelations were of not much legal consequence. Her outbursts had helped only to release some portions of the confessional statement to public domain, he said.
Though the final complaint was filed in the gold smuggling case, the Customs investigation in the dollar smuggling case allegedly involving some of the former officials of the UAE Consulate in Thiruvananthapuram, has not progressed much.
The revelations, according to another investigator, do not merit a further investigation by the ED as no new information on acquisition of wealth using the proceeds of the crime has surfaced. However, it may help the arguments of the ED on the culpability of Swapna and the bureaucrat in the money laundering case more acceptance in court, he said.
Interestingly, the fate of the UAPA case is hanging fire as the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, while considering the bail plea of the accused, had rejected the terrorism angle proposed by the NIA in the case.
The court had concluded that it was an economic offence case to be tried at the economic offences court. The NIA had plans to appeal against the High Court verdict. It may take some more time for the NIA court to take up the case in which the chargesheet was filed one year ago, sources said.
