The Madras High Court on Tuesday directed businesspersons Ranvir R. Shah and Kiran Velagapudi (Kiran Rao) to submit by Thursday all documents in their possession to prove the legal ownership of several idols and other artefacts recovered from their premises by the Idol Wing-Criminal Investigation Department (CID) recently.
A Division Bench of Justices R. Mahadevan and P.D. Audikesavalu issued the direction while hearing anticipatory bail petitions filed by the businesspersons. The petitioners said they were art enthusiasts who were in possession of the idols on the strength of the antiquities registration certificates issued by the Department of Archaeology.
When the senior judge in the Bench wanted to know since when Mr. Shah had begun collecting the idols, his counsel replied that the collections had been made since 1993. The court was also told that he had certificates issued by the Centre, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and other authorities with respect to 40 antique statues.
“Produce all the certificates by day after tomorrow,” the judge said. The Bench directed senior counsel R. Shunmugasundaram, representing Ms. Rao also to file the relevant documents in his client’s possession prove legal ownership of the idols.
‘Bid to tarnish image’
In her petition, Ms. Rao said since she was the director of several companies, her arrest would negatively affect the functioning of the firms.Referring to searches conducted by the Idol Wing CID in her Gopalapuram residence along with a media entourage, she said an orchestrated campaign was being carried out to tarnish her reputation though all the idols had been purchased through different sources on the bona fide belief that they had been procured legally
Further, explaining the circumstances which led to burying some of the statues in the lawns at her residence, she said that was done in a frantic state of mind after receiving an anonymous phone call on September 29. The caller had threatened to do away with her family members besides vandalising her antique collection if she did not part with a ransom of ₹60 lakh.
“The petitioner humbly submits that she erred in her judgment in a state of panic and extreme emotional distress and that she acted not with any mala fide intention but due to mere desperation of a mother fearing safety of her (nine-year-old) son and her old mother,” her petition read.