High Court: How could Indira’s fugitive ex buy cars in 2015 and 2017 if he absconded in 2014?

340
- Advertisement - [resads_adspot id="2"]

The police again came under scrutiny on their improper effort to investigate and arrest M Indira Gandhi’s ex-husband Muhammad Riduan Abdullah, and subsequently recover her youngest daughter Prasana Diksa.

High Court’s Judicial Commissioner Bhupindar Singh, who presided the judicial monitoring on the investigation, questioned the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC), which represented the police, on the seriousness of the police department on locating fugitive Muhammad Riduan.

Bhupindar asked Senior Federal Counsel Nur Idayu Amir why police have not been able to locate Muhammad Riduan despite two cars that were registered under his name in 2015 and 2017 in Malaysia, while the authorities had confirmed that he had left the country in 2014.

“If following the record, he had left the country in 2014. How then can he buy a Mercedes-Benz in 2015 and Nissan Frontier 2.5 in 2017 here?

“Why didn’t the police investigate the seller, the person who made the payment, how the payment was made and how was the transfer of ownership done?

“Cause when I bought a second-hand car recently, I need to be present physically at the Road Transport Department for my thumbprint for the transfer of ownership process,” he said.

Bhupindar also further questioned how come Muhammad Riduan’s driving licence is still active until 2022 and was renewed May 27, this year.

“Why police didn’t investigate this matter? How was the license renewal done if the person is not in Malaysia and why does he need a Malaysian driving license if he is not in Malaysia?” he asked.

To which Nur Idayu replied that the licence renewal can be done online.

He then asked if the police checked with the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) and Inland Revenue Board (LHDN) on whether any payment was made by any employee for Mohammad Riduan.

Nur Idayu said that police only checked the company which Mohammad Riduan had formerly worked, which has now changed ownership.

“I didn’t ask for the information of his employee. I wanted to know whether any payment was made to EPF or LHDN by any employee so that we can find out if the person is working in Malaysia or not.

“If he is not working, how then he can afford to purchase two cars. This is why I ask the police to check on this matter in the previous proceeding,” said Bhupindar.

Bhupindar also asked on the whereabouts of Mohammad Riduan’s second wife Nor Shelly Ashikin and four children aged three to 10.

To which Nur Idayu replied that the police could not locate them as they left for Thailand last year.

“So, does this fact suggests that her husband is in Thailand? Why didn’t she return to Malaysia after almost one and a half years? Did she have any relatives there? Also, a person needs a permit to stay in a different country.

“Why didn’t the police investigate all this? How is the cooperation between the Malaysian police and Thailand police on this matter? The exhibits submitted in the affidavit are not sufficient” he said.

Bhupindar also further asked if the police had checked with Bank Negara Malaysia whether any transactions were made in any banks here by Mohammad Riduan, to which Nur Idayu said that the police did not check.

Meanwhile, lawyer Rajesh Nagarajan, who represented Indira, said that this is a masterclass of stonewalling by the police.

“This is a contempt on the face of the court. The court has been kept in the dark. The court can’t understand the narrative on how the police are investigating this case despite instructions put by the court.

Choo Choy May

“Already one year and this no cooperation by the police. The investigation officer in this case is incompetent and this is done purposely because we know the police are competent,” he said.

“It has been 12 years since my client saw her daughter last. It comes to the extent (that) she said she only wants to see her daughter. She tears almost every time I speak to her,” he added.

Rajesh’s partner Sachpreetraj Singh Sohanpal told the court that it is almost like the court has to direct the investigation.

“If such is the case, I don’t think police can catch any criminals,” he said.

Bhupindar then ordered the police to outline the measures, efforts and strategies taken by the police in locating and arresting Mohammad Riduan in the next hearing on December 14.

“I already give three months for police to investigate all this matter. The exhibits in the affidavit did not help the court at all.

“This is why the lawyers are suggesting police are not serious in the investigation,” he said.

When met outside the court, Indira who was also accompanied by Indira Gandhi Action Team (Ingat) chairman Arun Dorasamy, said that the police gave a lot of excuses and incomplete investigations on tracking Mohammad Riduan and Prasana.

“This is really disappointing. As a mother, I’m waiting for almost 12 years. There is nothing about Prasana here.

“I don’t know what is going to happen to her. She is almost a grown woman without an identification card and any information.

“I think it’s about time all the authorities should address this matter seriously. It is about our law and order,” she said.

Meanwhile, Arun said the information submitted by the police in the affidavits today is old.

“We have our private investigators and Indira knows this information about a year ago. How difficult is it for the police to trace Mohammad Riduan’s second wife and four kids? They all are Malaysian citizens with MyKid.

Farhan Najib

“The investigation officer is new to this case. Based on what we witnessed today in the court, the judge is actually directing the investigation. This shows how low-grade is the police’s investigation,” he said. – MMO