Activist and Nhaveen family spokesman Arun Dorasamy is alleged to have been “rough and threatening” towards Kugendran, 22, last October.

Lead defence counsel Naran Singh said Kugendran had lodged a police report after meeting Arun at a restaurant in Tanjung Bungah.

In the report, which was read out in court, Kugendran claimed that Arun had slammed his fist on the table in frustration after the former said he knew nothing about a fight which led to Nhaveen’s eventual death.

In tendering the police report as evidence, Naran said the star witness, T Previin, 23, was also present at the meeting.

During cross-examination by the defence, Previin admitted he was there but said he was not involved in the discussion. He said he had tagged along with Arun for the meeting without knowing where they were headed.

He denied that Arun had slammed the table and spoke roughly with Kugendran.

“I know Kugendran, who is a friend of a friend. He was there at the scene (when Nhaveen was beaten up). I was not in the room for long,” he said, adding that he could not recall much of the conversation that took place between Arun and Kugendran.

Naran said it was incredulous that Previin could remember what occurred five years ago but could not recall events that took place some 10 months ago.

Naran then suggested that Previin and Arun had threatened Kugendran.

“Arun started questioning me, and suddenly he switched off the lights in the room (of the restaurant) and slammed the table… When I said I was not involved, he got angry and shouted at me, saying he would charge me in the Nhaveen case,” Naran said while reading out a portion of Kugendran’s police report.

Previin denied that this was so.

Naran then asked if it was right for him and Arun to question a potential witness, to which Previin said it was not right.

Denial of affidavit shocks defence

The defence grilled Previin over his affidavit against a gag order application by the prosecution on Arun. In the affidavit, Previin said the censure and gag order against Arun were draconian, as Arun was Nhaveen’s family spokesman.

Previin also said in the affidavit that police were shoddy in their probe into the murder and that the prosecution was “not effective” in its questioning of Nhaveen’s mother, D Shanti.

Previin caused a stir when he told the court today that the affidavit shown to him had not been written by him and that it also did not carry his signature, despite having his full name and MyKad number.

After a recess, Previin made an about turn, saying it bore his signature but that he was not sure of its content as it was prepared by his lawyer.

Naran then asked the court to have family watching brief lawyer Rajesh Nagarajan to be excused from court, as he might be questioned over the issue in the future, which was allowed. The lawyer’s firm also prepared the affidavit in question.

Naran reminded Previin about the seriousness of lying under oath and that his clients were facing a murder charge.

Judge Radzi Abdul Hamid then adjourned the session to tomorrow as the defence said it wanted to continue with a new line of questioning.

Yagoo Subramaniam and Maanveer Singh Dhillon also represented the accused, while Sukhindarpal Singh held a watching brief for the Bar Council.

S Gopinaath, 30, J Ragesuthan, 22, S Gokulan, 22, and two others have been charged with Nhaveen’s murder. The other two unnamed persons were juveniles when the offence took place.

They are accused of committing the offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code at the Jalan Bunga Raya park on June 9, 2017, between 11pm and midnight.

The five are also accused of committing a grievous assault against Previin near the Karpal Singh Learning Centre, Jalan Kaki Bukit, Bukit Gelugor between 11pm and midnight that day.