Perjury cop's case escalates to Supreme Court

A policeman, Mohamed Sajidh, who stands accused of perjury for lying in court about not having taken the oath of office, has filed a petition with the Supreme Court.

Sajidh was re-arrested after the High Court ruled that he should be prosecuted for his false testimony, given that he had, in fact, attended the oath-taking ceremony. He has been remanded in custody for 20 days following the High Court's verdict and is now appealing his remand at the Supreme Court. Sajidh is a resident of Thinadhoo in Gaafu Dhaalu atoll.

Sajidh's initial arrest stemmed from the discovery of illicit drugs during a raid in Thinadhoo, prompted by suspicions of e-cigarette possession. Sajidh, who had been serving as a Special Police Constable at Thinadhoo Police Station since May 7th of this year, was suspended following his arrest.

During the investigation, a search of Sajidh’s residence and motorbike uncovered a significant quantity of tobacco, nanosticks, vapes, vape cartridges, and 191.92 grams of substances suspected to be drugs. Despite his arrest in connection with these discoveries, the Thinadhoo Magistrate Court ordered Sajidh's release during the remand hearing, citing an incorrect court order for the arrest.

While Sajidh's lawyer has appealed the High Court's decision to the Supreme Court, the apex court has yet to accept the appeal. In its verdict, the High Court emphasized the dire need to enhance state policies and procedures to uphold public trust, particularly concerning the legal implications of occupations requiring an oath of office.

The unanimous verdict from the three-judge bench stated, "At the trial, he spoke as if he did not think there was anything wrong with taking monetary remuneration for a post without taking an oath. This is not what should happen to oaths sworn with the name of the Lord, or the way anyone should speak regarding such an oath. The allegations made by the prosecution in relation to Sections 512 and 533 of the penal code are given brevity as it is found that he had signed the oath affidavit."

The High Court ruling called for action against Sajidh, and former Attorney General and lawyer Aishath Azima Shakoor also suggested that Sajidh should face an additional charge of fraud and deceit in connection with the case.