Hypophrenia
New member
7 Year Jail To 13 For Beating Kerala Man To Death For Stealing Food In 2018A special court in Kerala today sentenced to seven years' imprisonment the 13 people convicted for beating a tribal man to death for allegedly stealing food articles in 2018 in Palakkad district.
Delivering the sentence, the court said, "Moral policing cannot be encouraged in civil society".
Madhu, a tribal man from Attappady, was beaten to death after he was caught and tied up by a group of local people, who accused him of theft on February 22, 2018.
More than five years after the incident, special court judge K M Ratheesh Kumar sentenced 13 out of the 16 accused in the case to seven years in jail for the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Calling it the "first mob lynching case in God's Own Country," the court said, "Let it be the last such case." Condemning the actions of the convicted, the court added, "The materials placed before the court reveal that the accused persons have assumed the role of moral police. Such moral policing can never be encouraged in a civilised society.
"Unless instances of such moral policing is deprecated by awarding adequate sentences, this practice will be repeated by like-minded persons." In its order on sentencing, the court noted that the accused "mercilessly inflicted injuries" on Madhu alleging that he had stolen food items.
The court said that even if the stolen items were found in Madhu's custody, it could only be said that he stole "because of the clamour of his stomach".
"For that allegation of minor theft, the acts done by the accused persons led to the death of Madhu...hence, the court cannot award a flea bite sentence in this case for the reason that the person who died in the incident is not a big shot," the judge said.
At the same time, the court did not give them the maximum punishment under the law for the offence as it was of the view that there was a chance they could be reformed into socially committed citizens as one of them had given Madhu a banana and another had offered him a cup of juice.
"These acts of A3 and A14 reveal that even now there exists remnants of humanitarian consideration in the mind of the accused and hence, the court finds that chances of reforming the accused into socially committed citizens cannot be ruled out," the judge said. The court also observed that "every saint has a past and every sinner has a future".
"For that reason and taking into account the grounds stated by the accused and their counsel, I am not inclined to award the maximum punishment provided in the law for the commission of the offence," the judge said in his 486-page judgment on the conviction and sentence of the accused. Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Rajesh M Menon, however, said that while he was happy with the conviction, the sentences imposed were "not sufficient".
"They deserved to get life imprisonment," he said, and added that he strongly believed the state would appeal for enhancement of punishment. The SPP said that not sentencing the convicts to life term was an "anomaly" in the court's decision.
The convicts, who were found guilty on Tuesday, were also sentenced for varying terms for other offences under the IPC, but as the jail terms have to be served concurrently, they will serve only 7 years, he said.
Madhu's family too expressed dissatisfaction with the punishment given to the convicts. "The sentence is not enough," his mother told reporters outside the court.
His sister agreed. "We are not satisfied with the punishment given. There has been a failure on the part of the court. The court probably did not understand what actually happened, how he was beaten and brought out from the forest. This court was meant to protect our interests," she said.
"If we do not get justice here, where will we have to go for that? The only option we have is to move the higher courts. We will get justice for Madhu even if we have to go to the Supreme Court for it," she added. She also urged the state government to set up a mental institution in Attappady and said that what happened to her brother should never again happen in Kerala.
In its judgment, the court also said that Madhu's death was a lesson for the police to take every complaint, even of minor theft, seriously.
It said that had the police apprehended Madhu on the complaints of theft, then he could have been treated and rehabilitated at the state's expense for his mental illness.
"In fact, this incident is a lesson to the police force in our state, reminding them that no complaint should be left unattended and all such complaints should be taken seriously.
"If the police pay blind attention to complaints of theft taking into account the value involved therein, that will result in developing a tendency of moral policing among the society," the judge said.
The court also directed initiation of perjury proceedings against 10 witnesses in the case for giving false evidence.
"Even the close relative of Madhu turned hostile to the prosecution case. Some of the witnesses dared to blindly deny their own visuals on CCTV, mobile phones etc when played in court, even though the visuals were crystal clear.
"Though this disgusting factor has not materially affected the finding of the court, it is unfair to encourage such practice of prime witnesses turning hostile to the prosecution case so as to subvert the judicial system," the court said.
The court, on the other hand, appreciated and acknowledged the role played by the media in paving the way for "rendering justice" to Madhu.
It said that had the media not given importance to the matter, "this case would not have ended like this".
Besides punishment for the offence under Section 304 II of IPC, the convicts were awarded varying sentences for several other offences under the IPC with the highest being seven years.
Of the 13 convicts, 12 were also punished for the offence under Section 3(1)(d) of the SC/ST Act.
A fine of over Rs one lakh was imposed on each of the 13 convicts by the court which said that if the amounts were realised, 75 per cent of it should be disbursed among Madhu's legal heirs.
"Out of the amount so disbursed to the legal heirs, 50 per cent of that amount shall be paid to the mother of the deceased Madhu," the court added.
The Palakkad District Legal Services Authority was also directed by the court to provide a reasonable amount as compensation to the legal heirs of Madhu under the Victim Compensation Scheme of 2021.
The 16th accused in the case was only held guilty of the offence of "assault or criminal force otherwise than on grave provocation" under Section 352 IPC and was therefore sentenced only to three months in prison and a fine of Rs 500.
The remaining two accused in the case were acquitted by the court.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
Delivering the sentence, the court said, "Moral policing cannot be encouraged in civil society".
Madhu, a tribal man from Attappady, was beaten to death after he was caught and tied up by a group of local people, who accused him of theft on February 22, 2018.
More than five years after the incident, special court judge K M Ratheesh Kumar sentenced 13 out of the 16 accused in the case to seven years in jail for the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Calling it the "first mob lynching case in God's Own Country," the court said, "Let it be the last such case." Condemning the actions of the convicted, the court added, "The materials placed before the court reveal that the accused persons have assumed the role of moral police. Such moral policing can never be encouraged in a civilised society.
"Unless instances of such moral policing is deprecated by awarding adequate sentences, this practice will be repeated by like-minded persons." In its order on sentencing, the court noted that the accused "mercilessly inflicted injuries" on Madhu alleging that he had stolen food items.
The court said that even if the stolen items were found in Madhu's custody, it could only be said that he stole "because of the clamour of his stomach".
"For that allegation of minor theft, the acts done by the accused persons led to the death of Madhu...hence, the court cannot award a flea bite sentence in this case for the reason that the person who died in the incident is not a big shot," the judge said.
At the same time, the court did not give them the maximum punishment under the law for the offence as it was of the view that there was a chance they could be reformed into socially committed citizens as one of them had given Madhu a banana and another had offered him a cup of juice.
"These acts of A3 and A14 reveal that even now there exists remnants of humanitarian consideration in the mind of the accused and hence, the court finds that chances of reforming the accused into socially committed citizens cannot be ruled out," the judge said. The court also observed that "every saint has a past and every sinner has a future".
"For that reason and taking into account the grounds stated by the accused and their counsel, I am not inclined to award the maximum punishment provided in the law for the commission of the offence," the judge said in his 486-page judgment on the conviction and sentence of the accused. Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Rajesh M Menon, however, said that while he was happy with the conviction, the sentences imposed were "not sufficient".
"They deserved to get life imprisonment," he said, and added that he strongly believed the state would appeal for enhancement of punishment. The SPP said that not sentencing the convicts to life term was an "anomaly" in the court's decision.
The convicts, who were found guilty on Tuesday, were also sentenced for varying terms for other offences under the IPC, but as the jail terms have to be served concurrently, they will serve only 7 years, he said.
Madhu's family too expressed dissatisfaction with the punishment given to the convicts. "The sentence is not enough," his mother told reporters outside the court.
His sister agreed. "We are not satisfied with the punishment given. There has been a failure on the part of the court. The court probably did not understand what actually happened, how he was beaten and brought out from the forest. This court was meant to protect our interests," she said.
"If we do not get justice here, where will we have to go for that? The only option we have is to move the higher courts. We will get justice for Madhu even if we have to go to the Supreme Court for it," she added. She also urged the state government to set up a mental institution in Attappady and said that what happened to her brother should never again happen in Kerala.
In its judgment, the court also said that Madhu's death was a lesson for the police to take every complaint, even of minor theft, seriously.
It said that had the police apprehended Madhu on the complaints of theft, then he could have been treated and rehabilitated at the state's expense for his mental illness.
"In fact, this incident is a lesson to the police force in our state, reminding them that no complaint should be left unattended and all such complaints should be taken seriously.
"If the police pay blind attention to complaints of theft taking into account the value involved therein, that will result in developing a tendency of moral policing among the society," the judge said.
The court also directed initiation of perjury proceedings against 10 witnesses in the case for giving false evidence.
"Even the close relative of Madhu turned hostile to the prosecution case. Some of the witnesses dared to blindly deny their own visuals on CCTV, mobile phones etc when played in court, even though the visuals were crystal clear.
"Though this disgusting factor has not materially affected the finding of the court, it is unfair to encourage such practice of prime witnesses turning hostile to the prosecution case so as to subvert the judicial system," the court said.
The court, on the other hand, appreciated and acknowledged the role played by the media in paving the way for "rendering justice" to Madhu.
It said that had the media not given importance to the matter, "this case would not have ended like this".
Besides punishment for the offence under Section 304 II of IPC, the convicts were awarded varying sentences for several other offences under the IPC with the highest being seven years.
Of the 13 convicts, 12 were also punished for the offence under Section 3(1)(d) of the SC/ST Act.
A fine of over Rs one lakh was imposed on each of the 13 convicts by the court which said that if the amounts were realised, 75 per cent of it should be disbursed among Madhu's legal heirs.
"Out of the amount so disbursed to the legal heirs, 50 per cent of that amount shall be paid to the mother of the deceased Madhu," the court added.
The Palakkad District Legal Services Authority was also directed by the court to provide a reasonable amount as compensation to the legal heirs of Madhu under the Victim Compensation Scheme of 2021.
The 16th accused in the case was only held guilty of the offence of "assault or criminal force otherwise than on grave provocation" under Section 352 IPC and was therefore sentenced only to three months in prison and a fine of Rs 500.
The remaining two accused in the case were acquitted by the court.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)