Lawyers for the family of death in custody victim S Balamurugan have rebutted inspector-general (IGP) Khalid Abu Bakar's claim the second autopsy report was "unclear" and needs further investigation.

"We refer to the statements made by IGP […] in which he claimed that the second autopsy results in S Balamurugan's case is 'very vague' and that 'it does not explain where is the blunt trauma' inflicted on the body.

"Firstly, there's nothing 'vague' about the second autopsy result, as alleged by the IGP.

"It clearly states the cause of death as ' coronary artery disease with multiple blunt force trauma'.

"This means that the heart failure was triggered by the beatings. Otherwise multiple blunt force trauma would not have been included as a cause of death by the pathologist," lawyers N Surendran and Latheefa Koya said in a statement today.

Upon Balamurugan's family's application, the court had ordered a second autopsy on the victim, which was conducted by Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) and the results were presented last Saturday.

The lawyers reminded the IGP that the police investigating officer was present when the HKL forensic team explained in detail to the family and lawyers the outcome of the autopsy.

"In addition, the police are also in possession of 82 autopsy photographs which detail the wounds on Balamurugan's body.

"How then can the IGP claim that the results are 'vague' or that the police don't know 'where is the blunt trauma on the body'?" Surendran and Latheefa asked.

'Why still probing wrongful confinement'

The duo also questioned why the case was still being investigated for wrongful confinement instead of murder, despite there being evidence that they said supported an immediate homicide investigation.

This, Surendran and Latheefa said, was depite the IGP having "clearly acknowledged" the presence of blunt force trauma, as stated in the second autopsy report.

"At the very least, investigations should be opened for much more serious offences, such as murder or culpable homicide or causing grievous hurt.

"Why is this still not done despite scientific evidence of beatings to the head, chest, back and legs?" the lawyers asked.

"Since multiple blunt force trauma has been established, why have no police personnel been arrested or suspended? The IGP appears silent on this point," they added.

Balamurugan, 44, was arrested on Feb 6 when he was found in the same car with two other men, one of whom was wanted by the police.

He died in police custody at the North Klang district police headquarters two days later on Feb 8.

'Why question pathologist?'

Surendran and Latheefa also questioned the necessity of the police to take statements from the HKL pathologist as he is not party to the case.

"He is not a witness in this case. He is a scientific investigator. He and his team have already given a detailed briefing in the presence of the police, and the police have the full set of photographs.

"Medical findings by pathologists cannot be recorded by way of police statements.

"And medical professionals carrying out their duties should not be subjected to the police investigation process," they said.

The explanations of the police and the IGP thus far, Surendran and Latheefa said, are "plainly unacceptable and their actions plainly inadequate".