The Seremban High Court has fixed this Friday to hear the judicial review application by P Karuna Nithi's family to challenge the request by the Attorney­-General's Chambers to re­open and introduce a new witness in the inquest.

The matter was disclosed to Malaysiakini by lawyer Eric Paulsen ( photo ) who said the application will be heard before Justice Kamaludin Md Said.

Karuna Nithi was found dead at the Tampin police lock­up on June 1, 2013, after being remanded following an altercation with his wife.

On Jan 28, the Seremban Coroner's Court ruled that the cause of his death was the result of assaults by both policemen and other lock­up detainees.

Coroner Jagjit Singh, a Sessions Court president, noted that Karuna Nithi had 49 injuries ­ mostly bruises ­ all over his body.

"My verdict is that Karuna Nithi's death was caused by multiple injuries as a result of physical assaults, abuses and other unlawful acts by persons unknown, but inclusive of police officers and other detainees in the police lock­up where the deceased was detained," he ruled.

It was reported that Karuna Nithi's brother, Elam Sezhian, filed the judicial review application at the High Court in Seremban on Aug 27, with case management on the matter fixed for Sept 18.

The application was filed by the firm of Messrs Daim & Gamany. Elam named the Negeri Sembilan legal adviser and the attorney-­general as respondents.

File an appeal, not introduce new evidence

Elam is seeking an order for leave to be granted to initiate the judicial review and an order of certiorari to quash the respondent's request to reopen the inquest to add a new witness.

He wants the order by the coroner to re­open the case to be set aside, and the ongoing proceedings to re­open the inquest to be suspended until the disposal of this application.

Elam ( photo ) said in his affidavit in support of the application that an application was made on June 24 and for his lawyers to attend case management on the matter on July 7. There, the lawyers were informed of the respondent's intention to re­open the case.

This is to allow them to call forensic specialist Dr Mohd Shah Mahmood from the Kuala Lumpur Hospital as an additional witness.

Elam's counsel said he believes the request to re­open the case is not feasible as the usual method for a party not satisfied with the decision is to file an appeal to the High Court, not introduce new evidence.

Furthermore, the introduction of an expert witness should have been made during the inquest and not after the coroner had made a decision.