Application has been made to quash charges, vacate October 2026 trial dates for three SOSMA detainees, says lawyer

Families of the 32 detainees, being held under SOSMA, outside the Klang High Court on a blistering hot afternoon as a case management went on for the detainees. It has been a year now since they have been detained in the Sungai Buloh prison without a trial and the uncertainty is hard on the famillies. Their trial will take place in October 2026, which will bring their time in prison even longer. Photo story by Hardew Singh.
Lawyer Rajesh Nagarajan.

KLANG, April 17: While the fate of the 32 men being held under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma) at the Sungai Buloh prison, will remain uncertain till their trial takes off in October next year, lawyers for three of the detainees have made an application to quash the charges against their clients.

They have also applied to vacate next year’s joint trial date for their clients.

Speaking to Weekly Echo, following a case management for the 32 detainees at the Klang High Court here, today, the counsel for Kogilan Arivalagan, 27, and Tineskumar Mahandiran, 27, Rajesh Nagarajan said an application was made earlier this week for his clients and another client, Kesavan Nair, represented by lawyer N. Surendran, for a separate trial date. Case management for the application has been set for April 22, 2025.

A joint trial is usually set only when the prosecutor seeks it, and since this has not been sought, it is not clear why the court had set a joint trial for 32 of them, he said. For now, the trial dates, beginning October 5, and ending on Nov 20, will see all of the detainees present at the court for the given dates. It will be a lengthy process.

Asked on whether he was seeking an earlier or later trial date from October, Rajesh said that this would not matter so long as his clients go through the proper process of justice.

Application to quash the charges on the three of them have been also made.

“The reason stated for the charges to be set aside is due to the vagueness of the charge sheet which does not explain how the accused became a member of the alleged organized criminal group “Geng TR” and the charge sheet also fails to state particulars that give sufficient notice of the element of the charge that “Geng TR” is an “organized criminal group.”

–WE