The body of Mathai, who died on July 28, has been kept at the Ranni Marthoma Hospital mortuary. His wife Sheeba and family are adamant that the body will not be buried till those responsible for his death are arrested.

The body of Mathai, who died on July 28, has been kept at the Ranni Marthoma Hospital mortuary. His wife Sheeba and family are adamant that the body will not be buried till those responsible for his death are arrested.

The body of Mathai, who died on July 28, has been kept at the Ranni Marthoma Hospital mortuary. His wife Sheeba and family are adamant that the body will not be buried till those responsible for his death are arrested.

Pathanamthitta: It has been three weeks since PP Mathai, a farmer in Kudapannakulam, Chittar, died allegedly in the custody of the forest officials, but there has been no arrest in the case yet.

The body of Mathai, who died on July 28, has been kept at the Ranni Marthoma Hospital mortuary. His wife Sheeba and family are adamant that the body will not be buried till those responsible for his death are arrested.

The investigation team indicated that it will not make any arrests until it collects sufficient scientific evidence and removes any possibility of the suspects changing their statements later.

The police have found serious crimes behind Mathai's death, including kidnapping, demanding of ransom, involuntary manslaughter and forgery of documents. 

The police had filed their interim report on the investigation in the Ranni magistrate's court four days ago.

However, the report has been criticised for not mentioning any names in the case in which forest guards are the accused and for including section 34 of the IPC after suggesting that less than five people are suspects in the case.

The investigation team has made serious findings, including that Mathai was taken into custody illegally and that the officers had tried to escape by forging documents after his death.

If the suspects are named in the police report, then they will have to be suspended as per service rules. It is being alleged that the police did not include their names in the report to prevent their suspension.

According to the family, there have been suggestions from many officials and people’s representatives that the arrests could be made after Mathai’s funeral.

The ruling party is of the view that any arrest now could lead to political gains for the opposition parties, which have been protesting against the death along with various other organisations.

The district administration held a video conference to reach an understanding with the family members but it did not succeed. The family then approached the high court seeking a CBI probe into the death.

The national and state human rights commissions have registered cases over the death.

The forest department suspended two officials and transferred seven others after Southern Circle Chief Forest Conservator Sanjan Kumar said in his report that Mathai's custody was illegal.

IPC Section 34 applied to protect officials?

Section 34 of the IPC is invoked for conspiracy when less than five people are involved in a crime. However, the police team investigating Mathai’s case found seven people were present when he was taken into custody and died.

Six officials have signed on the first initial information report regarding the custody submitted by the forest department. They said a person named Arun was also present at the spot.

Therefore, the claim in the police report that there were less than five people involved in the crime was a part of an attempt to protect forest officials, it is alleged.

Sections 141, 142, 143 and 149 are generally applied if more than five people are involved in a crime. However, the police said that the IPC sections in Mathai’s case were applied as per the legal advice of the public prosecutor.