JJ hits back...!!!

As expected, the TN govt has hit back with the junior seers' arrest after the SC's decision. But there seems to be no logic here.

The Seer was given bail by the SC on the ground that the TN govt doesnt have any substantial evidence to convict the Seer. Now, the TN govt claims that the junior seer knows all the details of the murder and arrested him for " conspiracy".

TN govt and TN police dont have any evidence against the seer and they arrested the Junior seer on the grounds that he "conspired" with the Seer. Isnt something missing here???

I could see only one motive behind all this.
The Seer cant enter into the Mutt and now the junior seer is arrested. The Mutt manager and accountant are already in jail. So, there is none who can adminster the Mutt in these hard times.
Isnt it conducive for TN govt and TN police to fabricate some evidence.

They claimed that if the Seer enters the Mutt he might influence the some witnesses in the Mutt. Now, what is the assurance that TN Govt and TN police dont influence the evidences as they have already tried?? Should they be allowed to enter the Mutt??

SIT has interrogated the junior seer some 2 weeks back and found nothing. So, do the TN police think SIT was not efficient??

T.N Govt
Since 2001, Sankararaman had been complaining about the seer's "relationship
with women" and on August 30, 2004, he gave the "last warning" to the Kanchi
Sankaracharya.

It was after receiving the "last warning" that the Sankaracharya called two
other accused and hatched the conspiracy to murder Sankararaman.

SC

Dealing with the prosecution claim, the Bench said: "There is absolutely no
evidence or material collected so far in investigation which may indicate
that the seer had ever shown any resentment against the deceased for having
made allegations against either his personal character or the discharge of
his duties as Sankaracharya of the Mutt."

Noting that the Sankaracharya had kept absolutely quiet for over three years
on the tirade of Sankararaman against him, the court said: "The petitioner
having kept quiet for over three years, it does not appeal to reason that he
suddenly decided to have Sankararaman murdered and entered into a conspiracy
for the said purposes."