Thiruvananthapuram, October 14: Giving the major blow to ruling Left Democratic Front (LDF) government in Kerala as Court of Judicial Magistrate (CJM) in Thiruvananthapuram rejected the discharge petition of Kerala education minister V Sivankutty and five other Left leaders in connection with the assembly ruckus case.
Rejecting the petiton, the magistrate R Rekha directed all accused to appear before the court on November 22 to frame charges, which will be later read out to them. Besides Sivankutty, the other accused in the case are E P Jayarajan, KT Jaleel, K Ajith, C K Sadasivan, and K Kunhammed, all opposition MLAs then. Both Sivankutty and Jaleel are currently members of the State Legislative Assembly.
During the hearing, the accused contended that the video of the assembly proceedings was heavily edited and the media blew the incident out of proportion. They also argued that their sole intention was to disrupt the budget speech and furniture was damaged by the security personnel during pushing and shoving in the assembly. However, the court rejected their contention and asked them to face charges. The counsel for the accused said he said he will move to the High Court. Earlier the High Court and Supreme Court had rejected their pleas to quash the case.
In March 2015, the Kerala assembly witnessed violent incidents after then opposition LDF legislators tried to prevent finance minister KM Mani, also the Kerala Congress (M) chairman, from presenting the budget alleging his role in the 2014 bar bribery case. Angry members snapped mikes, threw chairs, destroyed furniture, and damaged lights during the ruckus, which also resulted in two legislators getting hospitalised. The session was live when the violence took place and property worth ₹2.20 lakh was destroyed in the melee.
Since coming to power in 2016, the LDF tried to withdraw the case but the CJM court rejected the move in 2018. The government then moved the high court, which also turned down its plea. The Pinarayi Vijayan-led government had invoked the privilege of legislators and public interest to justify its decision to withdraw the case, but the high court rejected it saying privilege was not a license to unleash violence in the House.
.
.