A police inspector who arrested A Kugan in 2009, who is also the interrogation officer, gave conflicting testimony at the Kuala Lumpur High Court in the civil suit filed by Kugan’s mother, N Indra, compared to what he had said during the criminal trial.

Inspector Faaezal Monir, 31, had in the criminal trial involving constable V Navindran, who was convicted of hurting Kugan, told the Petaling Jaya Sessions Court that he was familiar with the lock-up rules and that he gave the order to interrogate the suspect for 24 hours.

NONE Faaezal was testifying in the RM100 million suit brought by Kugan's mother, N Indra ( right ).

Today, to questions from Indra’s counsel, Sivarasa Rasiah, Faaezal sang a different tune when he told the court he was not familiar with the lock-up rules.

At one point during the cross-examination, Sivarasa warned the witness not to give false evidence as he could be charged with perjury.

This was when Faaezal was shown a copy of a transcript of the proceedings in the sessions court in which he had also testified.

At today’s hearing, Faaezal said he was not familiar with the lock-up rules requiring detainees to be in their lock-up at night.

Replying to questions from Sivarasa, he said he did not ask the interrogation on Kugan be done continuously for 24 hours.

In the sessions court, Faaezal, who is now attached to the Kuala Selangor CID, had testified that he had ordered that Kugan be handcuffed while being interrogated.

“I do not agree that Kugan was interrogated for 24 hours straight as there are periods that I know when he was not interrogated,” he said.

The witness also replied he cannot remember whether there was a lock-up at the Taipan police station where Kugan was held from Jan 14 until his death on Jan 20, 2009.

Replying to questions from lawyer R Ramesh Sivakumar, Faaezal agreed that Kugan was a “special witness”, as he was allegedly caught with two luxury cars.

Following this, Faaezal admitted that interrogation for 24 hours was required as he was an important suspect.

Faaezal ignorant about the 45 injuries listed

Faazeal also told the court that he did not know how the 45 injuries stated in Kugan's autopsy report were inflicted.

The witness said this when asked by Sivarasa and by High Court judge VT Singham as well. He said in his checks on Kugan between Jan 15 and the night of Jan 20, Kugan was “baik” (in a good state).

“Kugan did not make any complaint of being assaulted or that he did not receive any food or drinks. Kugan gave full-cooperation to the police during his detention,” Faazeal said.

NONE Sivarasa then pointed out that Navindran had been charged with causing hurt to Kugan ( right ) on Jan 16 and suggested to Faazeal that the suspect was badly beaten between Jan 16 and 12.30am on Jan 20.

Justice Singham noted that the witness did not appear to know this, for all he knew was that Kugan was in a good condition.

The judge then asked Faazeal to look the extent of the injuries.

VT Singham: Can you tell the court how Kugan was, taking into consideration the 45 wounds as reported in the post-mortem report.

Faaezal: I am not sure as I did not see any injury.

VT Singham: How was Kugan's condition the final night?

Faaezal: Kugan was well,

“There were no injuries, right?” mocked Justice Singham and the witness said “no”.

Hearing continues on Dec 13 with the cross-examination of Deputy Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar.

Senior federal counsel Azizan Md Arshad appeared for Khalid, the IGP and the government.