HC acquits eight Dalits from charge of murdering caste Hindu leader

December 08, 2016 01:17 am | Updated 01:17 am IST - MADURAI:

The Madras High Court Bench here has set aside the conviction and life sentences imposed by a trial court last year on eight Dalits for allegedly murdering the leader of caste Hindus at Devakottai town in Sivaganga district on July 25, 2007 following a quarrel between the two groups over conducting Aadal Paadal (late night dance performance) programme in front of Silambani Vinayagar Temple.

Passing common orders on a batch of criminal appeals preferred by all the eight convicts, Justices S. Nagamuthu and M.V. Muralidaran held that the version of the complainant was doubtful and most of the witnesses in the case appeared to have been planted by the police. Hence, they chose to set aside the judgment passed by a Sessions Court in Sivaganga on September 30 last.

The judges pointed out that the complainant, who was none other than the father-in-law of the deceased, Veerappan, had initially lodged a complaint accusing as many as 11 individuals of having stabbed the victim when he was walking near Pitchai Chettiar’s house on Karuthavoorani Pillaiyar Temple Street. In the complaint, he had not mentioned the names of three appellants M. Bala, S. Kumar and V. Periyasamy.

Twist in the tale

After a few days, he gave a twist to the case by making a statement to the police that as many as six people mentioned by him in the complaint were not involved. He also stated that it was not K. Palani, as mentioned in his complaint, but M. Bala who stabbed the victim on his chest, back, abdomen and other parts of the body after the prime accused S. Jeyaraman had stabbed near the left ear.

“This is a major contradiction in the case of the prosecution and this creates an enormous doubt in the prosecution case,” the judges said. They pointed out that the complainant’s admission before the trial court that he had prepared the written complaint at his residence before approaching the police station only went to show that he would have named the accused “out of his own imagination” without having been present at the scene of crime.

In so far as two other independent witnesses who had reportedly witnessed the occurrence was concerned, the judges rejected their evidence on the ground that one of them had admitted to have not spoken about the occurrence for nearly 20 days to anybody and the other too had taken considerable time before claiming to have been an eye-witness to the incident. Further, their evidence contradicted with the complainant’s claim that no one but for him witnessed the occurrence.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.