Gold smuggling case: Not prepared to pay a penny as damages or tender apology, says Swapna Suresh’s advocate

Thiruvananthapuram (Kerala) [India], April 1 (ANI): Swapna Suresh, the prime accused in the Kerala gold smuggling case, has said that she is not prepared to pay a penny or apologise to Communist Party of India (Marxist) State Secretary MV Govindan after the latter served her a legal notice seeking an apology or compensation.

A legal notice was sent to Swapna Suresh over her defamatory accusations that MV Govindan had offered her money and threatened her to settle the Kerala gold smuggling case. On Friday, in her Facebook post, Swapna Suresh shared the reply she had given to CPIM State Secretary.

The notice by Swapna Suresh’s advocate read, “At the outset, it is informed that this notice has been issued by your client without properly understanding what exactly has transpired. I request you to advise your client to again hear the Facebook live of my client which was conducted on 09.03.2023 once again which will enable your client to understand the contents of the Facebook live which was basically made in Malayalam a language which your client can understand easily and without much difficulty.”

“It is true that on 09.03.2003 my client has in her Facebook account conducted a live interaction with Facebook friends. This live interaction was conducted by my client in the backdrop of veiled a threat issued by one Mr Vijay Pillai in the matter of Gold Smuggling case in which my client is an accused,” the notice further said.

“My client clearly stated in her Facebook live only the matters told to her by Mr Vijay Pillai. He informed my client that he has approached my client on behalf of your client and that if my client refuse to take the offer of Rs 30 crore and withdraw from the fight against the Chief Minister and family, the life of my client will be in danger. My client has only disclosed the facts which was told by Mr Vijay Pillai to my client and my client has never stated anywhere in the live that your client has send Mr Vijay Pillai.

“My client has never stated that your client has intimated my client through Mr Vijay Pillai about the consequences of my client’s refusal to withdraw from the fight, but only stated that Mr Vijay Pillai has told my client that your client has told him that I will have to face the consequences. It is in this background I suggest you to request your client go through the Facebook live again which is mainly in Malayalam the language which your client can easily understand and you can also assist him in getting through the English words used by my client in the live,” the notice read.

“It is true that the Facebook live of my client was viewed by the public and was widely published in all English and Malayalam newspapers and telecasted in all Malayalam news channels in Kerala. But the claim of your client that the news has discredited your client is a matter to be proved by your client as the burden is on your client prove that your client has gone credit to be discredited by adducing evidence before the court,” the notice stated.

“The entire content of the notice is based on paragraph 1 wherein the allegations are made by your client without understanding what exactly has happened. But still lam repeating, for helping your client to understand the situation, that my client has never said that Mr Vijay Pillai is an emissary of your client. My client has never said that your client or his family members are in any manner associated or acquainted with Mr Vijay Pillai. The allegation of your client is that false and baseless allegation levelled by my client has maligned the reputation of your client.

“It is further alleged that my client’s allegation has tarnished the goodwill and disparaged the impeccable reputation of your client and has caused disrepute to your client. My client is totally rejecting these baseless and silly allegations. It is the duty of your client to prove that your client has reputation and goodwill in the society and it is for your client to prove the same by adducing evidence when the case goes for trial as my client is prepared to face the trial. My client is not aware about the reputation and goodwill of your client as claimed by him,” it added.

The notice further said, “My client is also not aware about the tall claims made by your client in the last but one paragraph of your notice. My client is not aware about the claim that your client is a person with high repute and integrity and as mentioned earlier and it is for your client to prove all these tall claims made by him through your notice before a court of law to prove that my client’s action has dented such an image he claims to have. Therefore this entire notice is totally misconceived and misplaced as it has been sent without exactly knowing or understanding what exactly has transpired in this issue including the Facebook live of my client. So therefore I suggest that you better advise your client to defer from issuing such silly notices to anyone without understanding the actual situation and advise your client to get proper legal help to understand the exact situation before issuing such lawyer notices.”

“Therefore, I inform you that my client is not prepared to pay even a penny as damages to your client and not prepared to tender any apology to your client and inform your client on behalf of my client that my client welcomes all legal steps that will be initiated by your client for defamation in the court of law,” the notice stated.