Political Criticism “Communally Distorted”: CPI(M) Leader P. Hareendran Clarifies Palathayi Case Statement
Kannur: CPI(M) Kannur District Secretariat member P. Hareendran has clarified that his remarks regarding the Palathayi sexual assault case were misinterpreted by the Muslim League and SDPI. He stated that his opposition to communal organizations, including the Muslim League, SDPI, and Jamaat-e-Islami, was twisted into an accusation against the Muslim community.
Hareendran alleged that a ‘capsule’ suggesting he made communal remarks was created and subsequently picked up by the Muslim League, a practice he claimed the League has been engaging in for a long time.
He further demanded an end to the practice of interpreting opposition to communal organizations as insulting the Muslim community. Hareendran emphasized that if the LDF had not been in power, the Palathayi case would not have progressed to its current stage. He added that there have been previous instances involving victims and perpetrators from the same community, but neither the Muslim League, SDPI, nor Jamaat-e-Islami protested in those situations. Instead, he claimed, they attempted to suppress such incidents.
Hareendran had previously alleged that the Muslim League and SDPI intervened in the Palathayi case because the accused was Hindu. He questioned whether these organizations would intervene in the same manner if a ‘Ustad’ (religious teacher) was accused of sexually assaulting children. He stated that it was the CPI(M) that pursued the case all this time, and there was no one else to manage the case or conduct witness examinations. He argued that the Muslim League and SDPI, then and now, were not focused on providing assistance to the Palathayi girl but rather on turning the case against the CPI(M). P. Hareendran’s clarification came after his previous statement sparked controversy.
The Thalassery Fast Track Pocso Court recently found Padmarajan, a former BJP leader and teacher, guilty and sentenced him to life imprisonment until death.
The Fast Track Special Court Judge, A.T. Jalajarani, stated in her verdict that the life imprisonment under Indian Penal Code Section 376 AB for raping a child below 12 years of age means imprisonment until the end of life. Additionally, a fine of one lakh rupees was imposed under the same section, failing which he would undergo one year of rigorous imprisonment. The court also sentenced him to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of one lakh rupees each under Sections 5(f) and 5(l) of the Pocso Act. Failure to pay these fines would result in one year of rigorous imprisonment for each. The court ruled that the sentences under the Pocso Act can be served concurrently, but the life imprisonment under IPC must be served after the Pocso sentences.