Top court restores 1990 evidence tampering case against Kerala MLA Antony Raju

The Supreme Court reinstated criminal proceedings against Kerala MLA Antony Raju in a 1990 evidence-tampering case involving a drugs trial. It directed the trial court to conclude the case within a year.

In Short

• Antony Raju accused of tampering evidence in 1990 drugs case
• Trial court has been directed to conclude proceedings within a year
• Kerala High Court's previous decision overturned by Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday restored criminal proceedings against Kerala MLA and former minister Antony Raju in the 1990 underwear evidence-tampering case. The case involves allegations of tampering with crucial evidence in a drugs case handled by Raju during his tenure as a junior lawyer.

A bench of Justices CT Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol reinstated the trial court's order taking cognizance of the chargesheet against Raju. The Bench also directed the trial court to conclude proceedings within one year.

The Supreme Court held that the Kerala High Court erred in holding that the criminal proceedings were barred due to Section 195(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Antony Raju has been ordered to appear before the trial court on December 20 or the next working day.

THE CASE

The case stems from a 1990 drug seizure involving an Australian national caught with drugs (charas) hidden in his underwear. Antony Raju, then a junior lawyer representing the accused, collected the seized underwear, a key piece of evidence, when the court allowed the return of the accused's belongings.

The sessions court convicted the Australian, but the Kerala High Court later acquitted him, citing that the underwear did not fit.

The High Court also noted possible evidence tampering and ordered a vigilance enquiry. This led to an FIR in 1994 against Raju and a court staff for offences including conspiracy and tampering under the IPC. Despite the charges, the case saw significant delays, remaining unresolved for decades. Raju approached the High Court in 2022 after media reports spotlighted the case's prolonged pendency.