Swapna Suresh moves Kerala High Court for anticipatory bail after raising allegations against CM Pinarayi Vijayan

Swapna Suresh and Sarith PS, two of the main accused in the gold smuggling case of 2020, have approached the Kerala High Court seeking anticipatory bail in a new case registered by the Kerala Police after Suresh's recent allegations against Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan [Swapna Suresh & Anr. v Station House Officer & Anr.]..In July 2020, pursuant to an investigation conducted by Enforcement Directorate (ED) into money laundering, illegal financial transactions and massive gold smuggling through diplomatic channels, suspected offenders, including Suresh, were arrested and interrogated in Kerala.After spending over a year in jail, Suresh was released in November 2021 after securing bail..A few days ago, after she recorded a statement in the gold smuggling case before a Magistrate Court, Suresh spoke to the media alleging that the Chief Minister, his wife and daughter, Member of Legislative Assembly KT Jaleel and several high ranking officials were involved in anti-social and anti-national activities involving the Consulate where she used to be employed. She revealed that she had deposed in detail about the same before the Magistrate.Subsequently, it was widely reported that Sarith was kidnapped by four persons. It was later learnt that they were police officers of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau who were investigating a different case. .A blazing political row ensued with allegations and counter-allegations flying at political parties across the board. .Subsequently, former education minister and current Member of Legislative Assembly of the ruling front, KT Jaleel, filed a complaint at the Thiruvananthapuram Cantonement Police Station. He alleged that Suresh had conspired with former MLA PC George, who has been mired in his own controversies of late, to spread fake news and cause unrest in the State. This led to the registration of a first information report (FIR) against Suresh for allegedly committing offences under Section 153 (provocation with intention to cause riot) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).Suresh has approached the Kerala High Court seeking anticipatory bail in this FIR. Sarith has not been arrayed was an accused but has still approached the Court since he apprehends arrest. .In the bail application moved by Suresh and Sarith through advocates R Krishna Raj, R Pratheesh, ES Soni, Sangeetha S Nair and Resmi A, it has been stated that the complaint lodged by Jaleel was a false one.The plea also claimed that the petitioners were falsely implicated in all the cases against them arising out of gold smuggling. The plea alleged that while they were in jail before securing bail in 2021, they were harassed, threatened and coerced to keep mum about the supposed involvement of the higher-ups in the government. After she was unable to take this pressure, Suresh approached the special court for PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) cases seeking to file a statement before the magistrate under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the plea said. Suresh's plea stated that yesterday, on June 8, a person claiming to be close to the Chief Minister and veteran CPI(M) leader Kodiyeri Balakrishnan came to meet her and pressured her to withdraw her 164 statement."He informed that already a case has been registered against the 1st petitioner and if they do not surrender before the Chief Minister by openly stating that she has given the 164 statement at the instigation of the petitioners’ present counsel, the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) and the BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party. He threatened the petitioners with dire consequences to the effect that they will not see daylight as cases will be registered against them in such a way they will have to remain in jail for long," the plea said..Further, it was argued that the ingredients of Section 153 will not be attracted here since the provision clearly says that an act will attract the offence only if it is done with the intent to cause a riot.Even though the offences alleged are both bailable, the petitioners stated that their apprehension of arrest is not unfounded prompting them to seek anticipatory bail from the High Court.