PUTRAJAYA, Dec 9 – The Court of Appeal today postponed the government’s challenge against the wrongful death suit won by the family of A. Kugan, who died in police detention, to February 28 owing to public interest.

Datuk Mohamad Ariff Yusoff, one of three presiding judges, said the court would allow at least one whole day to hear submissions from both sides.

“Since it’s a matter of public interest, I’ll give you one to two days, just in case, take your time,” he told the lawyers.

On July 1, Home Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi announced the government’s intention to appeal even as Malaysians bay for blood over reports on the alarming number of deaths in police custody — cases similar to Kugan’s controversial death in 2009.

In the ruling over the negligence suit brought by Kugan’s family, the High Court on June 26 awarded his mother, N. Indra, RM851,700 in damages for assault and battery, false imprisonment, misfeasance of public office, pain and suffering.

Kugan, then 22 years old, was detained as a luxury car theft suspect. He was arrested in Puchong on January 14, 2009 and held overnight at the Puchong Jaya police lock-up before police obtained a remand order.

He was taken to the Taipan USJ, Subang Jaya police station two days later for questioning and was found dead four days after that.

Former police constable V. Navindran was the only one held responsible for Kugan’s death. Last year, he was convicted and sentenced to three years’ jail. He is currently appealing the conviction.

Today, the family’s lead counsel, Sivarasa Rasiah, said the government’s appeal should be dismissed because High Court judge Datuk V.T. Singham gave a “very comprehensive and thorough judgment” analysing all the issues.

“We will come here to defend the judgment as a correct judgment, on facts and that the correct award was handed out.

“Our position is quite straightforward. Yes, Navindran was part of the group of people who had assaulted but he was not the only one, they were making him a scapegoat to try to whitewash (the case), the judge correctly found that was exactly what was going on that Navindran was used as a scapegoat in a cover up,” he told reporters outside the courtroom.

Meanwhile, senior defence counsel Mohd Azizan Mat Ashraf said that the government’s appeal is based on the contention that Sections 7 and 8 of the Civil Law Act 1956 only provide for compensation for estate and exemplary claims.

“On our legal point of view, Kugan is not entitled because the law doesn’t allow it because the main issue is that they brought this matter under Section 7 and 8 of the Civil Law Act.

“The court has gone about importing these claims which are under the common law claims,” he said, adding that the ruling will be a precedent in Malaysia,” he said.

Mohd Azizan said the government is appealing the RM300,000 in exemplary damages, RM50,000 for misfeasance in public office and RM100,000 for false imprisonment.

Lawyer Ramesh Sivakumar, who is appealing on behalf of Navindran, said the law does not include damages for misfeasance in public office, which was included in the damages awarded to the claimants.

“First time it has come out and the High Court allowed it, whether they are going to affirm it or overturn it, we’ll see. What the judge has done is that he has given ... over and above what is under the law,” he said.

He also pointed out that the law was to compensate, and not to punish.