Defence Attorney Siand Dhurjon today grilled Special Branch Head Senior Superintendent Prem Narine over the destruction of police records linked to the October 31, 2025, detention of Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed and his father, businessman Nazar Mohamed.

Narine had previously testified that he destroyed three official books containing information recorded during the detention, along with details from other investigations. He said the books were shredded and later burned at the Special Branch compound in early January, roughly two months after the detention.

Among the information recorded was an interaction involving the Mohameds and Sandy Rao, a Senior Inspector with the United States Department of Justice. Narine said the page containing the information also included details from other investigations, which prevented him from photographing it before the book was destroyed. He said he instead transcribed the information and wrote it on the arrest warrants.

The issue came under renewed scrutiny when Dhurjon questioned Narine on Standing Order 28, which governs police pocketbooks and their retention. Dhurjon put to Narine that the order requires completed pocketbooks to be retained for three years and prohibits the erasure or obliteration of entries, raising questions about how the books could have been destroyed only months after the detention.

Narine maintained that his work within Special Branch meant his handling of sensitive intelligence was also governed by Standing Order 50 and the Secrets Act. Dhurjon then pressed him to identify a specific provision in the nine-page Standing Order 50 that authorised or required the destruction of the documents. Narine did not identify a specific provision, but maintained that Standing Order 50 and the Secrets Act informed his handling of the records.

The defence also questioned the loss of the original records, suggesting their destruction removed the contemporaneous documentation that could have verified Narine's present account. Narine disagreed, maintaining that the information he transcribed could assist the court.

The cross-examination later shifted to Narine's knowledge of public statements concerning Mohamed. Dhurjon asked whether Narine was aware of adverse comments allegedly made about Mohamed by government officials. Narine said he was not.
The cross-examination continues on October 28.