IPOH: The High Court here has urged the police to be more proactive in tracking down the whereabouts of M. Indira Gandhi’s ex-husband, K. Pathmanathan.
Justice Datuk Norsharidah Awang said this on Thursday (June 25) after questioning why police only acted nearly two months after receiving information from the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) on April 24, 2026.
Lawyer Harsimran Kaur said that the police had obtained information regarding Pathmanathan and his wife’s employers from EPF on April 24, 2026, located in Kelantan.
“EPF provided the information to the police on April 24, but police only went to Kelantan and carried out investigations on June 15. That is my concern. Why was action not taken immediately?” she said.
Harsimran also raised concerns that while EPF disclosed information relating to the employers’ addresses, it did not provide details on when the withdrawals were made.
“We appear numerous of times, I believe that there is updates and I'm not doubting what the police is doing but I think that the proactiveness is not there.
“With all due respect, if information is received that can be acted upon immediately, I don’t understand why there was a delay of two months.
“My issue is only that. I acknowledge that you get information but I can't be telling you how to act on the information as well.
“Other than that, I understand they are trying their best but I think the proactiveness has to be there,” she added.
Norsharidah then directed the question to Asst Supt Yap Siew Cheng of the Perak police contingent headquarters’ Criminal Investigation Department, asking why action was only taken in June despite the information being received in April.
In response, Yap said that various task has been carried out, including efforts to locate witnesses and record statements as part of the ongoing investigation.
Norsharidah said action must be taken promptly once information is received, as any delay could mean the person is no longer at the location.
“In this case, two months later, the person might disappear. That is very disappointing. Be more proactive.
“If the person is still working, then go to the address and audit. Ask for the named person,” she said.
“I know the police are doing their job, it involves strategy,” she added.
The court fixed Nov 27 for the next case mention.
When met outside the court Indira said that she was uncertain regarding the recovery of her missing daughter Prasana Diksa, who had turned 18 in April.
“I don’t know when it is going to materialise as I’m getting very exhausted with running up and down for the court cases. My hope is only that it can end soon,” she said, breaking into tears outside the court.
