|CHAUDHRY: Still in Australia.|
There is little doubt the military regime's dictatorial Attorney General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, tried to influence Indian national Muskan Balaggan to implicate Suva lawyer Rajendra Chaudhry on a rape charge.
Since then Balaggan, who was staying at Chaudhry's home after he offered her accommodation as surety to secure her bail after she was charged for trying to smuggle cocaine into the country early this year, has withdrawn her complaint against Chaudhry.
Her 6 page statement given to us dated 22nd July was published in full last night. The statement was written by Balaggan but was not given to police, raising the question: what does she intend to do with it and where will this take the case, which is said to be still open?
Given her admission and accusation against Aiyaz Sayed Khaiyum and her subsequent charging by police for giving false information about Chaudhry raping her, the question that also must be asked is this: why is Rajendra Chaudhry still not back in Fiji - more than six weeks after going to Australia and despite assurances in court by lawyers appearing on his behalf that he "is coming next week or in a week?"
And why did Rajendra's wife lodge a police complaint accusing Balaggan of stealing her mobile phone and clothes? This, well after she left the Chaudhry home to be with her uncle Ranjit Singh in Ra. It is clear Rajendra's wife lodged the complaint after Balaggan reported Chaudhry Junior allegedly raped her.
If the rape or any sexual incident did not happen (as stated by Balaggan in her statement) why the need to frame the Indian woman?
In light of the above questions, we have made further inquiries. And we can reveal that Balaggan was seen in the company of Rajendra Chaudhry's office staff on July the 22nd entering a pet shop in Flagstaff - barely two minues walking distance from the lawyer's office.
The owner of the pet shop is one Sher Bahadur. It is Bahadur's stamp and name that appears as a witness on Balaggan's statement.
So who urged Balaggan to make the statement? Was she forced or influenced? The answer, it would appear, is known only to Muskan Balaggan and Rajendra Chaudhry (who is believed to have opened a new office in Sigatoka) or his office staff.
Meanwhile, information has emerged the illegal AG's office was recently involved in other efforts to interfere with the judicial process. Sources say a law clerk from the AG's office was seen in the office of a well-known lawyer 'negotiating' the release of a millionaire businessman. More to come.