dalam mahkamah tinggi di kuala lumpur …...dalam mahkamah tinggi di kuala lumpur dalam wilayah...

DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI DI KUALA LUMPUR

DALAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN KUALA LUMPUR

(BAHAGIAN SIVIL) GUAMAN NO. WA- 22NCVC -341 -07 / 2017

ANTARA

1. A. SANTAMIL SELVI A/P ALAU MALAY @ ANNA MALAY [Wakil Administratrix Harta Pusaka Balasubramaniam A/L Perumal (Simati)]

2. A. SANTAMIL SELVI A/P ALAU MALAY @ ANNA MALAY [Balu Kepada Balasubramaniam A/L Perumal (Simati)]

3. KISHEN A/L BALASUBRAMANIAM

4. MENAGA A/P BALASUBRAMANIAM

5. REESHI A/L BALASUBRAMANIAM [Seorang budak yang mendakwa melalui ibu dan sahabat wakil beliau A. Santamil Selvi A/P Alau Malay @ Anna Malay]

….PLAINTIF-

PLANTIF

DAN

1. DATO’ SRI MOHD NAJIB BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK

2. DATIN PADUKA SERI ROSMAH MANSOR

3. DATO’ AHMAD JOHARI BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK

4. DATO’ MOHD NAZIM BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK

5. TAN SRI CECIL WILBERT MOHANARAJ ABRAHAM

6. SUNIL ABRAHAM

7. ZAINAL ABIDIN BIN MUHAYAT

8. DEEPAK JAIKISHAN A/L JAIKISHAN REWACHAND

! 1

9. ARULAMPALAM A/L S. MARIAMPILLAI ...DEFENDAN-DEFENDAN

PERNYATAAN PEMBELAAN DEFENDAN KE-8

1. Defendan ke-8 tidak berpengetahuan terhadap kandungan Perenggan

1 Pernyataan Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif bertarikh 13.7.2017. Defendan

ke-8 seterusnya menyatakan bahawa Defendan ke-8 hanya pernah

mengenali si mati, iaitu Balasubramanian a/l Perumal.


2 Pernyataan Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif.


3 Pernyataan Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya

menyatakan bahawa Defendan ke-8 tidak berpengetahuan terhadap

kapasiti peribadi Plaintif ke-3, ke-4 dan ke-5.

4. Defendan ke-8 mengakui kandungan perenggan 4 Pernyataan

Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif.

! 2

5. Defendan ke-8 mengakui kandungan Perenggan 5 Pernyataan

Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya menyatakan

bahawa Defendan ke-2 merupakan rakan perniagaannya juga.

6. Defendan ke-8 mengakui kandungan perenggan 6 Pernyataan

Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif.


Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya menyatakan

bahawa Defendan ke-4 merupakan rakan perniagaannya juga.

8. Defendan ke-8 mengakui kandungan perenggan-perenggan 8 hingga

12 Pernyataan Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif.

9. Defendan ke-8 tidak berpengetahuan mendalam terhadap kandungan

Perenggan 13 Pernyataan Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif. Defendan ke-8

hanya mempunyai pengetahuan am seperti mana yang dilaporkan oleh

media semasa dan apa yang telah dinyatakan oleh simati kepadanya.

! 3

10.Defendan ke-8 tidak berpengetahuan terhadap kandungan Perenggan

14 Pernyataan Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif. Defendan ke-8 hanya

mempunyai pengetahuan am seperti mana yang dilaporkan oleh media

semasa dan apa yang telah dinyatakan oleh si mati kepadanya.


Tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif. Defendan ke-8 akan mengemukakan segala

bukti-bukti yang relevan pada peringkat bicara penuh nanti.

12.Defendan ke-8 mempunyai pengetahuan terhad kandungan

Perenggan 16 setakat mana konsipirasi ini telah dirancang oleh

Defendan Pertama, dan ke-2 Seterusnya Defendan ke-8 menyatakan

bahawa Defendan ke-8 , Defendan ke-4 dan Defendan ke-6, telah

diarah untuk memastikan kejayaan konspirasi ini yang diarahkan

secara terperinci DATO’ SRI MOHD NAJIB BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK

(‘Defendan Pertama’) dan DATIN PADUKA SERI ROSMAH MANSOR

(‘Defendan Kedua’). Bagi perenggan – perenggan Butir-Butir

Kecederaan dan Kerugian dalam Pernyataan Tuntutan Plaintif di mana

merupakan perenggan-perenggan 16 (i) , 16 (ii) (a), 16 (ii)(b), 16(ii)(c),

16(iii) (a), 16 (iii)(b) , 16 (iii)(c), 16 (iv) , 16 (v) , 16 (vi) dan 16(vii) ;

Defendan ke-8 menyatakan seperti yang berikut:-

a. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (i) di mukasurat 5

Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menyatakan bahawa nilai RM

840,000.00 adalah dipertikaikan. Plaintif-Plaintif diletakkan di

! 4

bawah beban bukti yang kukuh. Nilai tuntutan oleh Plaintif-

Plaintif ini harus dibuktikan di Mahkamah dahulu dengan segala

bukti-bukti yang relevan. Defendan ke-8 sesungguhnya percaya

bahawa tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif terhadap Defendan ke-8 adalah

salah, tidak berasaskan fakta yang betul dan mendatangkan

ketidakadilan serta prejudis kepada Defendan ke-8, dan

sesungguhnya Defendan ke-8 mempunyai pembelaan ke atas

tuntutan Plaintif dan sepatutnya tuntutan ini dibuat hanya

kepada Defendan Pertama dan Defendan ke-2 yang menjadi

dalang ( ‘mastermind’) dan benefisiari konspirasi ini.

b. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (i) (a) di

mukasurat 5 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menyatakan bahawa nilai

RM 162,000.00 adalah dipertikaikan. Plaintif-Plaintif diletakkan

di bawah beban bukti yang kukuh. Nilai tuntutan oleh Plaintif-










! 5

c. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (ii) (b) di


RM 90,000.00 adalah dipertikaikan. Plaintif-Plaintif diletakkan di











d. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (ii) (c) di








! 6






e. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (iii) di mukasurat

6 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menyatakan bahawa kandungannya

adalah dipertikaikan. Plaintif-Plaintif diletakkan di bawah beban

bukti yang kukuh. Nilai tuntutan oleh Plaintif-Plaintif ini harus

dibuktikan di Mahkamah dahulu dengan segala bukti-bukti yang

relevan. Defendan ke-8 sesungguhnya percaya bahawa

tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif terhadap Defendan ke-8 adalah salah,

tidak berasaskan fakta yang betul dan mendatangkan






f. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (iii) (a) di



! 7











g. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (iii) (b) di













! 8

h. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (iii) (c) di













i. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (iv) di mukasurat

6 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menyatakan bahawa nilai

kehilangan pendapatan sebagai guru tadika sebanyak RM

3,000.00 dari 04.07.2008 dan berterusan, adalah dipertikaikan.

Plaintif-Plaintif diletakkan di bawah beban bukti yang kukuh.

Nilai tuntutan oleh Plaintif-Plaintif ini harus dibuktikan di

Mahkamah dahulu dengan segala bukti-bukti yang relevan.

Defendan ke-8 sesungguhnya percaya bahawa tuntutan

! 9

Plaintif-Plaintif terhadap Defendan ke-8 adalah salah, tidak

berasaskan fakta yang betul dan mendatangkan ketidakadilan

serta prejudis kepada Defendan ke-8, dan sesungguhnya

Defendan ke-8 mempunyai pembelaan ke atas tuntutan Plaintif

dan sepatutnya tuntutan ini dibuat hanya kepada Defendan

Pertama dan Defendan ke-2 yang menjadi dalang

( ‘mastermind’) dan benefisiari konspirasi ini.

j. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (v) di mukasurat

6 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menyatakan bahawa, nilai tuntutan

penyenggaraan dan servis semua pinjaman dari Julai 2008

hingga Mac 2013 dengan jumlah RM 2500.00 sebulan adalah

dipertikaikan. Plaintif-Plaintif diletakkan di bawah beban bukti

yang kukuh. Nilai tuntutan oleh Plaintif-Plaintif ini harus

dibuktikan di Mahkamah dahulu dengan segala bukti-bukti yang

relevan. Defendan ke-8 sesungguhnya percaya bahawa

tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif terhadap Defendan ke-8 adalah salah,

tidak berasaskan fakta yang betul dan mendatangkan






! 10

k. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (vi) di mukasurat

7 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menyatakan bahawa nilai RM

100,000.00 adalah dipertikaikan. Plaintif-Plaintif diletakkan di











l. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada Perenggan 16 (vii) di mukasurat

7 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menyatakan bahawa ganti rugi am

untuk trauma dan penderitaan yang telah dialegasikan oleh

Plaintif-Plaintif ini harus dibuktikan di Mahkamah dahulu dengan

segala bukti-bukti yang relevan. Defendan ke-8 sesungguhnya

percaya bahawa tuntutan Plaintif-Plaintif terhadap Defendan

ke-8 adalah salah, tidak berasaskan fakta yang betul dan

mendatangkan ketidakadilan serta prejudis kepada Defendan

ke-8, dan sesungguhnya Defendan ke-8 mempunyai pembelaan

! 11

ke atas tuntutan Plaintif dan sepatutnya tuntutan ini dibuat

hanya kepada Defendan Pertama dan Defendan ke-2 yang

menjadi dalang ( ‘mastermind’) dan benefisiari konspirasi ini.

13.Bagi perenggan – perenggan Butir-Butir Kes Plaintif-Plaintif Terhadap

Defendan-Defendan di mukasurat 7-11 Pernyataan Tuntutan Plaintif di

mana merupakan perenggan-perenggan (i) , (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), (vi),(vii),

(viii), (ix), (x), (xi), (xii), (xiii), (xiv), (xv), (xvi), (xvii), (xviii), (xix) (xx),

(xxi), (xxii), (xxiii); Defendan ke-8 menyatakan seperti yang berikut:-

a. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (i) di mukasurat 7 di

Pernyataan Tuntutan dan mengakui kandunganya.

b. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (ii) di mukasurat 7 di


c. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (iii) di mukasurat 8 di

Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menafikan kandunganya dengan

keras. Plaintif-Plaintif diletakkan di bawah beban bukti yang

kukuh. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya menafikan peranan ‘ejen’

seperti yang dialegasikan. Setakat pengetahuan Defendan-8,

‘ejen’ tersebut adalah DATO’ MOHD NAZIM BIN TUN ABDUL

RAZAK (‘Defendan ke-4’) dan DATO’ AHMAD JOHARI BIN TUN

! 12

ABDUL RAZAK (‘Defendan ke-3’). Defendan ke-4 dan ke-3

merupakan ejen kepada Defendan Pertama dan ke-2. Defendan

ke-8 seterusnya menyatakan bahawa Defendan ke-8 hanya

telah diarahkan untuk menguruskan perjumpaan Si Mati dengan

adik Defendan Pertama, dan Defendan Pertama telah memberi

arahan sulit kepada Defendan ke-4 untuk menurut arahan

seperti yang telah diberikan oleh Defendan Pertama ; iaitu untuk

menukar ‘SD 1’ jikalau tidak mahu nyawa dia dan keluarganya

diancam.

d. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (iv) di mukasurat 8 di



kukuh. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya menyatakan bahawa

Defendan ke-8 telah bertemu dan menghantar si mati ke the

Curve untuk bertemu dengan DATO’ MOHD NAZIM BIN TUN

ABDUL RAZAK (‘Defendan ke-4’).

e. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (v) di mukasurat 8 di



kukuh. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya menyatakan bahawa

Defendan ke-8 telah mengambil si mati untuk berjumpa dengan

DATO’ MOHD NAZIM BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK (‘Defendan

! 13

ke-4’) yang mana Defendan ke-4 telah memberi ancaman

kepada si mati.

f. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (vi) di mukasurat 8 di

Pernyataan Tuntutan dan mengakuinya hanya setakat Defendan

ke-8 telah memperkenalkan Defendan ke-4 kepada si mati,

kerana itu adalah arahan daripada Defendan Pertama dan

Defendan ke-2 yang merupakan abang kepada Defendan ke-4.

Defendan ke-4 telah mengancam si mati dan mengarahnya

untuk mengikut arahan abangnya, Defendan Pertama, supaya

keluarganya bebas dari ancaman seterusnya oleh Defendan

Pertama.

g. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (vii) di mukasurat 8

di Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menafikan kandunganya. Defendan

ke-8 tidak menempah apa-apa bilik ataupun hadir di dalam bilik

hotel. Defendan ke-8 hanya berada di Hotel Hilton sehingga jam

lebih kurang 3 pagi dan selepas itu, pulang ke rumahnya.

h. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (viii) di mukasurat 8

di Pernyataan Tuntutan dan mengakui kandungannya.

Defendan ke-8 seterusnya menyatakan bahawa Defendan

Pertama telah menelepon Defendan ke-3 di hadapan Defendan

! 14

ke-8 untuk membuat Akuan Berkanun dan ini berlaku semasa

saya berada di kediaman rasmi Timbalan Perdana Menteri

pada masa itu (‘Defendan Pertama’) di Putrajaya Sri Satria.

i. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan-perenggan (ix) dan

(x) di mukasurat 9 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menafikannya

dengan keras. Plaintif-Plaintif seterusnya diletakkan di bawah

beban bukti yang kukuh. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya menyatakan

bahawa SUNIL ABRAHAM (‘Defendan 6’) telah memberikan

sesalinan ‘SD 2’ kepada Defendan ke-8 dan telah berjumpa

dengan si mati di biliknya untuk memberinya melihat Akuan

Berkanun ‘SD 2’ itu dan sejurus itu, ZAINAL ABIDIN BIN

MUHAYAT (‘Defendan 7’) atas arahan dan kawalan Defendan

ke-5 dan Defendan ke-6 , yang saya tidak pernah jumpa

sebelum malam itu telah berjumpa Defendan 6 di bilik Si Mati

untuk menyempurnakan tandatangan SD itu.

j. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xi) di mukasurat 9 di


k. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xii) di muka surat 9

Pernyataan Tuntutan, dan menyatakan bahawa Defendan ke-5

! 15

dan Defendan ke-6 selepas itu takut untuk mengikut Si mati ke

sidang akhbar dan Defendan ke-9 disuruh untuk menolong pada

saat akhir. Defendan ke-5 dan Defendan ke-6 tidak pernah

menafikan dan/atau mempertikaikan fakta-fakta ini yang

dipaparkan di media seluruh Malaysia pada waktu itu.

l. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xiii) di muka surat 9

Pernyataan Tuntutan dan menafikan kandungannya dengan


kukuh. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya menyatakan bahawa jelas

dari sidang media itu si mati telah berinteraksi dengan media.

Segala bukti-bukti yang relevan akan dibuktikan di Mahkamah

pada peringkat bicara penuh nanti.

m. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xiv) di muka surat 9

dan 10 Pernyataan Tuntutan, dan menyatakan bahawa

Defendan ke-8 tidak berada di Hotel itu pada masa sidang

media itu.

n. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xv) di muka surat

10 Pernyataan Tuntutan, dan menyatakan saya tidak hadir pada

masa itu serta saya tidak ada setiausaha.

! 16

o. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xvi) di muka surat

10 Pernyataan Tuntutan, dan menyatakan van itu telah disewa

oleh kawan Si Mati dan wang pengangkutan diberi dari

sumbangan DATO’ MOHD NAZIM BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK

(Defendan ke-4).

p. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xvii) di muka surat

10 Pernyataan Tuntutan, dan menyatakan bahawa saya telah

dipanggil oleh Majlis Peguam (Malaysian Bar) untuk member

keterangan tetapi telah diugut oleh wakil Defendan Pertama dan

Defendan Kedua untuk mendiamkan diri.

q. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xviii) di muka surat

10 Pernyataan Tuntutan, dan menyatakan bahawa Defendan

ke-8 akan mengemukakan bukti-buktinya pada peringkat bicara

penuh.

r. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xix) di muka surat

11 Pernyataan Tuntutan, dan mengakui ianya atas arahan

Defendan Pertama dan Defendan ke-2 serta disempurnakan

oleh Defendan ke-3, Defendan ke-5 dan Defendan ke-6.

! 17

s. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan-perenggan (xx) dan

(xxi) di muka surat 11 Pernyataan Tuntutan, dan mengakui

kandungannya sejauh mana arahan Defendan 1 dan Defendan

2 bersama adik beradik Defendan 1 turut memaksa perkara ini

dilaksanakan untuk memenuhi arahan Defendan Pertama dan

Defendan ke-2. Defendan ke-8 akan mengemukakan bukti

buktinya yang relevan pada peringkat bicara penuh nanti.

t. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xxii) di muka surat

11 Pernyataan Tuntutan, dan menyatakan bahawa pada

pendapat saya, si mati telah membaca tetapi berkemungkinan

tidak memahami sepenuhnya kerana tiada peguamnya bersama

untuk memberikan penjelasan.

u. Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan (xxiii) di muka surat

11 Pernyataan Tuntutan, dan menyatakan bahawa kandungan

perenggan tersebut tidak benar. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya

menyatakan bahawa selepas kejadian ini banyak malapetaka

telah berlaku kepadanya mungkin kerana sumpah perempuan

yang dibunuh bernama Altantuya dan juga anak dalam

kandungannya yang masih belum lahir.

! 18

14.Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan 17 Pernyataan Tuntutan

dan menyatakan bahawa isu tersebut harus ditentukan oleh

Mahkamah. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya akan mengemukakan bukti-

buktinya pada masa bicara penuh nanti.

15.Defendan ke-8 merujuk kepada perenggan 18 Pernyataan Tuntutan

dan menyatakan bahawa kesemua peguam yang telah mewakili saya

dilantik oleh Defendan Pertama dan Defendan Kedua dan dibayar oleh

Defendan Pertama dan wakilnya. Defendan ke-8 seterusnya

menyatakan bahawa Defendan ke-8 dipaksa akur kepada paksaan dan

ugutan walaupun Defendan ke-8 telah cuba batalkan perlantikan

peguam Defendan ke-8 yang dibiyayai dan dipaksa untuk diterima.

16. Defendan ke-8 dengan rendah diri memohon kepada Mahkamah yang

Mulia ini untuk memberikan immuniti kepada Defendan ke-8 seperti

immuniti yang diminta daripada Peguam Negara yang terdahulu iaitu

Tan Sri Gani Patail pada 13.2.2013 , supaya saya dapat memberikan

penjelasan terperinci mengenai konspirasi ini di Mahkamah tanpa

sebarang ugutan dan ancaman yang berterusan terhadap saya.

17.Kecuali sebagaimana yang diakui dengan nyata terdahulu daripada ini,

Defendan ke-8 menafikan setiap dan tiap-tiap pernyataan dalam

! 19

Pernyataan Tuntutan para Plaintif bertarikh 13.7.2017 seolah-olah ia

dinyatakan di dalam ini dan disangkal dengan khususnya.

18.Oleh yang demikian, Defendan ke-8 memohon agar tuntutan Plaintif –

Plaintif ditolak dengan kos.

Bertarikh pada 25 haribulan Oktober 2017.

...…………………………………. DEEPAK JAIKISHAN

A/L JAIKISHAN REWACHAND No. K/P: 720311-04-5165 Mewakili diri sendiri

Pernyataan Pembelaan bagi Defendan ke-8 ini difailkan oleh DEEPAK JAIKISHAN A/L JAIKISHAN REWACHAND yang mempunyai alamat penyampaian di NO.6 SIMPANG TUNKU PUTRA TAMAN DUTA, 50480 KUALA LUMPUR.

! 20

! 21

TERJEMAHAN INGGERIS

ENGLISH TRANSLATION

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR

(CIVIL DIVISION)

CIVIL SUIT NO. WA- 22NCVC -341 -07 / 2017

BETWEEN

1. A. SANTAMIL SELVI A/P ALAU MALAY @ ANNA MALAY [Administratrix Representative of the Estate of Balasubramaniam A/L Perumal (deceased)]

2. A. SANTAMIL SELVI A/P ALAU MALAY @ ANNA MALAY [Widow of Balasubramaniam A/L Perumal (deceased)]

3. KISHEN A/L BALASUBRAMANIAM

4. MENAGA A/P BALASUBRAMANIAM

5. REESHI A/L BALASUBRAMANIAM [an infant suing by his mother and next friend, A.Sentamil Selvi A/P Alau Malay @ Anna Malay]

….PLAINTIFFS

AND

1. DATO’ SRI MOHD NAJIB BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK

2. DATIN PADUKA SERI ROSMAH MANSOR

3. DATO’ AHMAD JOHARI BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK

4. DATO’ MOHD NAZIM BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK

5. TAN SRI CECIL WILBERT MOHANARAJ ABRAHAM

6. SUNIL ABRAHAM

7. ZAINAL ABIDIN BIN MUHAYAT

8. DEEPAK JAIKISHAN A/L JAIKISHAN REWACHAND

! 22

9. ARULAMPALAM A/L S. MARIAMPILLAI ...DEFENDANTS

8TH DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT OF DEFENCE

1. The 8th Defendant has no knowledge with regards to the contents of

Paragraph 1 of the Plaintiffs’ Statement of Claim dated 13.7.2017. The

8th Defendant further states that the 8th Defendant only knew the

deceased, Balasubramanian a/l Perumal only due to this SD matter.

2. The 8th Defendant has no knowledge as to the contents of Paragraph 2

of the Statement of Claim.

3. The 8th Defendant has no knowledge as to the contents of Paragraph 3

of the Plaintiffs’ Statement of Claim. Further, the 8th Defendant has no

knowledge as to the personal capacity of the 3rd, 4th and 5th Plaintiffs.

4. The 8th Defendant admits to the contents of Paragraph 4, of the

Statement of Claim.

! 23

5. The 8th Defendant admits to the contents of Paragraph 5 of the

Statement of Claim. The 8th Defendant thereon, states that the 2nd

Defendan is also a business partner.


Statement of Claim.


Statement of Claim. The 8th Defendant theron states the the 4th

Defendant is also a business partner.

8. The 8th Defendant admits to the contents of paragraphs 8- 12 of the

Statement of Claim.

9. The 8th Defendant has no in depth knowledge to the contents of

Paragraph 13 of the Statement of Claim. The 8th Defendant only knows

in so far as the information reported in the general media, as well as

information stated by the deceased himself.

! 24

10.The 8th Defendant has no knowledge as to the contents of Paragraph

14 of the Statement of Claim. The 8th Defendant only knows in so far

as the information reported in the general media, as well as information

stated by the deceased himself.

11. The 8th Defendant admits the contents of Paragarph 15 of the

Statement of Claim. The 8th Defendant will adduce relevant evidence

during the course of the full trial.

12.The 8th Defendant has limited knowledge to the contents of Paragraph

16 in so far as the conspiracy planned by the First Defendant and the

Second Defendant. Further, the 8th Defendant states that the 8th

Defendan , 4th Defendant and the 6th Defendant were ordered to

ensure the completion of this conspiracy as per the specific orders of

DATO’ SRI MOHD NAJIB BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK (‘ First Defendant’)

and DATIN PADUKA SERI ROSMAH MANSOR (‘ 2nd Defendant’). With

reference to paragraphs of Particulars of Injury And Loss Suffered By

the Plaintiffs in the Statement of Claim which consists of paragraphs 16

(i) , 16 (ii) (a), 16 (ii)(b), 16(ii)(c), 16(iii) (a), 16 (iii)(b) , 16 (iii)(c), 16

(iv) , 16 (v) , 16 (vi) dan 16(vii) ; the 8th Defendant states as follows:-

a. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (i) at page 5 of the

Statement of Claim and states that the sum of RM 840,000.00 is

verily disputed. The Plaintiffs are placed under a strict burden of

proof. The sum claimed by the Plaintiffs must firstly be proved at

! 25

Court with the relevant evidence. The 8th Defendant verily states

that the claims of the Plaintiffs against the 8th Defendant are

wrong , based on wrong facts, brings injustices and prejudices

on the 8th Defendant; wherefore the 8th Defendant has a valid

defence considering that these allegations should be made

against the First and 2nd Defendants only for being the

masterminds and beneficiaries of this conspiracy.

b. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (ii) (a) at page 5 of the











c. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (ii) (b) at page 5 of the




! 26








d. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (ii) (c) at page 5 of the











e. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (iii) at page 5 of the

Statement of Claim and verily disputes the contents. The

Plaintiffs are placed under a strict burden of proof. The sum

! 27

claimed by the Plaintiffs must firstly be proved at Court with the

relevant evidence. The 8th Defendant verily states that the

claims of the Plaintiffs against the 8th Defendant are wrong ,

based on wrong facts, brings injustices and prejudices on the

8th Defendant; wherefore the 8th Defendant has a valid defence

considering that these allegations should be made against the

First and 2nd Defendants only for being the masterminds and

beneficiaries of this conspiracy.

f. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (iii) (a) at page 6 of the











! 28

g. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (iii) (b) at page 6 of the











h. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (iii) (c) at page 6 of the











! 29

i. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (iv) at page 6 of the

Statement of Claim and states that the loss of earnings as a

kindergarden teacher calculated at RM 3000.00 from 4.7.2008

till to date is verily disputed. The Plaintiffs are placed under a

strict burden of proof. The sum claimed by the Plaintiffs must

firstly be proved at Court with the relevant evidence. The 8th

Defendant verily states that the claims of the Plaintiffs against

the 8th Defendant are wrong , based on wrong facts, brings

injustices and prejudices on the 8th Defendant; wherefore the 8th

Defendant has a valid defence considering that these

allegations should be made against the First and 2nd Defendants

only for being the masterminds and beneficiaries of this

conspiracy.

j. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16(v) at page 6 of the

Statement of Claim and states that the maintainence and

servicing of the loans from July 2008 to March 2013 calculated

at RM 2500.00 per month are verily disputed. The Plaintiffs are

placed under a strict burden of proof. The sum claimed by the

Plaintiffs must firstly be proved at Court with the relevant

! 30

evidence. The 8th Defendant verily states that the claims of the

Plaintiffs against the 8th Defendant are wrong , based on wrong

facts, brings injustices and prejudices on the 8th Defendant;

wherefore the 8th Defendant has a valid defence considering

that these allegations should be made against the First and 2nd

Defendants only for being the masterminds and beneficiaries of

this conspiracy.

k. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (vi) at page 7 of the











l. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 16 (vii) at page 7 of the

Statement of Claim, and verily states that the general

damagesfor trauma and suffering as alledged by the Plaintiffs

! 31

must firstly be proved at Court with all the relevant evidence.

The Plaintiffs are placed under a strict burden of proof. The sum

claimed by the Plaintiffs must firstly be proved at Court with the

relevant evidence. The 8th Defendant verily states that the

claims of the Plaintiffs against the 8th Defendant are wrong ,

based on wrong facts, brings injustices and prejudices on the

8th Defendant; wherefore the 8th Defendant has a valid defence

considering that these allegations should be made against the

First and 2nd Defendants only for being the masterminds and

beneficiaries of this conspiracy.

13. In reference to the paragraph for Particulars of the Plaintiffs Case

Against the Defendants at pages 7-11 of the Statement of Claim under

paragrahs (i) , (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), (vi),(vii),(viii), (ix), (x), (xi), (xii), (xiii),

(xiv), (xv), (xvi), (xvii), (xviii), (xix) (xx), (xxi), (xxii), (xxiii); The 8th

Defendant states as follows:-

a. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (i) at page 7 of the

Statement of Claim and admits to it’s contents.

b. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (ii) at page 7 of the

Statement of Claim and admits to it’s contents.

! 32

c. The 8th Defendant referts to the contents of paragraph (iii) at

page 8 of the Statement of Claim and verily denies to it’s

contents. The Plantiffs are put to strict proof. The 8th Defendant

thereon denies the alledged role of an ‘agent’. In so far as the 8th

Defendant’s knowledge the ‘agent’ is DATO’ MOHD NAZIM

BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK (‘4th Defendant’) and DATO’ AHMAD

JOHARI BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK (‘3rd Defendant’). The 4th and

3th Defendants are agents of the First and 2nd Defendants. The

8th Defendant thereon states that the 8th Defendant was only

ordered to arrange a meeting between the deceased, and the

younger brother of the First Defendant. The First Defendant had

also given confidential orders to the 4th Defendant to expressly

follow the orders of the First Defendant; being which, to change

‘SD 1’ if he did not want his life and his family’s lives to be in

danger.

d. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (iv) at page 8 of the

Statement of Claim and verily denies it’s contents. The Plaintiffs

are placed under a strict burden of proof. The 8th Defendant

thereon states that the 8th Defendant had met and sent the

deceased to the CURVE in order to meet DATO’ MOHD NAZIM

BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK (‘4th Defendant’).

! 33

e. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (v) of the Statement of

Claim and verily denies it’s contents. The Plaintiffs are placed

under a strict burden of proof. The 8th Defendant thereon states

that the 8th Defendant had brought the deceased to meet DATO’

MOHD NAZIM BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK (‘4th Defendant’) in

which, the 4th Defendant had threatened the deceased.

f. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (vi) at page 8 of the

Statement of Claim and admits in so far as, the 8th Defendant

had introduced the deceased to the 4th Defendant, pursuant to

the order of the First Defendant and the 2nd Defendant who is

the elder brother to the 4th Defendant. The 4th Defendant had

threatened the deceased and ordered that the 4th Defendant’s

elder brother’s (First Defendant) commands be carried out

should the deceased ‘s family be free from future threats by the

First Defendant.

g. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (vii) at page 8 of the

Statement of Claim and verily denies it’s contents. The 8th

Defendant did not book any rooms or was present in the room of

the hotel. The 8th Defendant was in the Hilton Hotel until

approximately 3 a.m. and then, had proceeded to return home.

! 34

h. The 8th Defendant referts to paragraph (viii) at page 8 of the

Statement of Claim and admits to it’s contents. The 8th

Defendant thereon states that the First Defendant had made a

call to the 3rd Defendant in front of the 8th Defendant; detailing in

the call to make the Statutory Declaration, and this transpired

when the 8th Defendant was in the First Defendant’s official

residence of the then Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia in

Putrajaya, Sri Satria.

i. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraphs (ix) and (x) at page 9 of

the Statement of Claim and verily denies it’s contents. The

Plaintiffs are put to strict proof. The 8th Defendant states that

SUNIL ABRAHAM (‘6th Defendant’) had given a copy of ‘SD 2’

to the 8th Defendant and had met with the deceased in the room

to pass the Statutory Declaration, and after that study it also;

soon after ZAINAL ABIDIN BIN MUHAYAT (‘7th Defendant ’)

under the orders and control of the 5th Defendant as well as the

6th Defendant, whom the 8th Defendant had never met before,

had met with the 6th Defendant in the room of the deceased with

the reason to complete the signing of the SD.

j. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (xi) at page 9 of the

Statement of Claim and admits to its contents.

! 35

k. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (xii) of the Statement of

Claim and states that the 5th Defendant and the 6th Defendant

were afraid to follow the deceased to the press conference , and

the 9th Defendant was asked to assist at the last minute. The 5th

and 6th Defendats have till now never denied and/or refuted the

facts circulted by the media in Malaysia at that time.

l. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (xiii) at page 9 of the

Statement of Claim and verily denies its contents. The Plaintiffs

are placed under strict proof. The 8th Defendant theron states

that it was clear from the press conference that the deceased

had interacted with the media. All relevant evidence will be

presented before this Honourble Court at the trial stage.

m. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (xiv) at page 9 and 10 of

the Statement of Claim and states that the 8th Defendant was

not present at the Hotel during the press conference.

n. The 8th Defendant referts to paragraph (xv) at page 10 of the

Statement of Claim and states that the 8th Defendant was not

present at the place nor did the 8th Defendant have a secretary.

! 36

o. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (xvi) at page 10 of the

Statement of Claim, and states that the van which was rented by

the friend of the deceased and the transportation were provided

by DATO’ MOHD NAZIM BIN TUN ABDUL RAZAK ( 4th

Defendan).

p. The 8th Defendant refers to paragaraph (xvii) at page 10 of the

Statement of Claim and states that the 8th Defendant was called

by the BAR Council to testify. However, the 8th Defendant was

forced to remain silent due to threats by the representative of

the First and Second Defendants.

q. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (xviii) at page 10 of the

Statement of Claim dan states that the 8th Defendant will

disclose all relevant evidence during the trial stage.

r. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (xix) at page 11 of the

Statement of Claim , and admits that it was on the orders of the

First and 2nd Defendants and completed by the 3rd Defendant ,

5th Defendant and the 6th Defendant.

! 37

s. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraphs (xx) and (xxi) at page 11

of the Statement of Claim and admits to the contents, in so far

as the orders of the First Defendant and 2nd Defendant together

with the siblings of the First Defendant also forced this matter to

be carried out to fulfil the orders of the First and 2nd Defendants.

The 8th Defendant will adduce the necessary evidence during

the course of the full trial.

t. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (xxii) at page 11 of the

Statement of Claim and states that based on the 8th Defendant’s

opinion, the deceased had read, but possibly not understood the

contents because his solicitor was not present to explain the

contents.

u. The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph (xxiii) at page 11 of the

Statement of Claim and states that it’s contents are not true. The

8th Defendant thereon states that after the incident many

mishaps had occurred perhaps due to the curses of a murdered

woman called Altantuya who was also pregnant at the material

time.

! 38

14.The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 17 of the Statement of Claim

and states that the isu must first be determined at Court. The 8th

Defendant will adduce the necessary evidence during the course of the

full trial.

15.The 8th Defendant refers to paragraph 18 of the Statement of Claim

and states that all the previous solicitors appointed by the 8th

Defendant to represent him was appointed by the First and Second

Defendants and the solicitors were paid by the First Defendant and the

representative of the First Defendant. The 8th Defendant thereon states

that the 8th Defendant was forced to succumb to the demands as well

as threats, even though the 8th Defendant had attempted to cancel the

appointed solicitors who were paid for and forced to be accepted.

16. The 8th Defendant humbly prays to this Honourable Court to give

immunity for the 8th Defendant as requested to the previous Attorney

General, Tan Sri Gani Patail back in 13.2.2013; in order for the 8th

Defendant to freely provide detailed explanations to the Court which

are free from any threats or danger which may occur to the 8th

Defendant.

! 39

17.Wherefore unless specifically stated herein, the 8th Defendant verily

denies the Plaintiffs statements in the Statement of Claim dated

13.7.2017 in its entirety, as if it was individually denied each and every

one of it traverse seriatim.

18.Based on the reasons given herein above, the 8th Defendant prays for

this entire legal action and the Plaintiffs’ claims to be dismissed with

costs.

Dated this 25th Day of October 2017

...…………………………………. DEEPAK JAIKISHAN

A/L JAIKISHAN REWACHAND NRIC No: 720311-04-5165 Self representing

! 40

This 8th Defendant’s Statement of Defence is filed by DEEPAK JAIKISHAN A/L JAIKISHAN REWACHAND with the address of service at NO.6 SIMPANG TUNKU PUTRA TAMAN DUTA, 50480 KUALA LUMPUR.

! 41

dalam mahkamah tinggi di kuala lumpur …...dalam mahkamah tinggi di kuala lumpur dalam wilayah...

Documents