HC sets free four in double murder case, orders action against cop for shoddy probe

Madurai: Acquitting four people sentenced by the trial court to undergo life imprisonment in a double murder case in Dindigul district in 2023, Madras high court ordered departmental action against the investigation officer for conducting slipshod investigation in the case.

According to the prosecution, Kannan saw his wife with his relative Selvaraj in a compromising position. Thereafter, a panchayat was held where a customary divorce was effected between Kannan and his wife. At the panchayat, Periyasamy supported Kannan, leading to enmity between Selvaraj and Kannan. Subsequently, Kannan went to Chennai for work. In May 2012, he came back to his native place to attend a family function. On May 18, when he and Periyasamy were standing near a shop in Thadikombu, Selvaraj and his accomplices murdered them. Police registered a case and arrested the accused.

In 2023, the additional district and sessions court in Dindigul convicted and sentenced Selvaraj, Selvapandi, Muthukumar and Thoongan to undergo life imprisonment, and acquitted three others. Challenging the conviction and sentence, the four had preferred the present appeals.

A division bench of Justice N Anand Venkatesh and Justice K K Ramakrishnan observed that even though there are crucial witnesses in the case whose statements ought to have been recorded under Section 161(3) Cr PC and who should have been examined as witnesses before the court, it was not done by the investigation officer who was unable to give any explanation when questioned in the course of cross examination.

The court said that in the light of conflicting versions given by the eyewitnesses coupled with non-examination of vital witnesses, an adverse inference has to be drawn to the effect that those vital witnesses were not examined since the true facts would have then surfaced.

The court said the investigating officer conducted one of the most slipshod investigations seen in recent times. “Two precious lives have been lost and going by the postmortem reports, we find that very serious injuries had been sustained by deceased persons. The prosecution has failed to prove its case only because of the bizarre manner in which the investigation officer had conducted the investigation, the judges observed and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.

The judges then directed to initiate departmental action against the investigation officer under the relevant service rules and it shall be completed as expeditiously as possible after affording opportunity to the officer.