The police and the Attorney-General's Chambers have consented to a second post-mortem on M Krishnan who died while in police custody on Jan 7.

NONEThe settlement was recorded before Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Justice Mohd Zabidin Mohd Diah (left) this afternoon.

The second post-mortem is expected to be performed at the Universiti Malaya Medical Centre on Friday morning before a pathologist, not necessarily Dr Prashant N Samberkar, which was a request by Revathi.

Krishnan's family was represented by lawyer Gurmit Singh Hullon, while the police and attorney general chambers, who were named as respondents, were represented by senior federal counsel Mazelan Jamaluddin.

Krishnan's family and a witness have claimed that he was assaulted in the Bukit Jalil police station lock-up, and died as a result of his injuries.

The Hospital UKM, which did the post-mortem, attributed his death to a stomach ulcer.

Police brutality?

NONEKrishnan's widow, P Revathi, 37, (right), said she believed Krishnan's death was caused by police brutality and had demanded that a second post-mortem be conducted.

She filed an application at the Kuala Lumpur High Court yesterday.

Revathi named the Bukit Jalil police station chief, the Cheras OCPD, the inspector-general of police, the Kuala Lumpur magistrate, and the attorney-general as respondents.

Krishnan's family and an independent witness had disputed the cause of death as inflammation of the ulcer, based on bruises found on the body. The witness alleged that he and Krishnan had been assaulted by the police.

Revathi, also sought that the body be taken from the HUKM to UMMC for the purpose of the post-mortem; for a lawyer to be present during the autopsy; and for costs of the action to be borne by the respondents.

She asked that a copy of the second post-mortem report, as well as a copy of the HUKM post-mortem report, be handed over to her solicitors on her behalf.

Also sought were the police report, witness statements and recorded statements.

Demands withdrawn

Revathi, a homemaker with six children aged between eight and 17, also applied for an inquest to be held under Section 334 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

However, following today's consent judgment the family has withdrawn their demands for that.

NONEPKR vice-president N Surendran (right), whom had highlighted the plight of Revathi commented the second post mortem should have been conducted earlier without the family having to file the application.

"It has become a trend for the police and the attorney general to only react after the family has filed an application.

"It seems they are testing the family's resolve and patience, which is unnecessary in the first place," he said.

Gurmit, who has handled a similar case in Johor, was in agreement, that it was only after family members filed an application that the authorities reacted.

He said it has resulted in the family going through the anguish of having to deal with the death and the prolonged process of burial.