Madhu Lynching | 'Moral Policing Can Never Be Encouraged, Let This Be The Last Mob Lynching Case' : Kerala Court [Read Judgment]
The Special Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Mannarkkad convicted 14 of the 16 persons accused in the Madhu Lynching Case. The case pertains to death of a mentally challenged tribal youth, Madhu, who was lynched in February 2018, on suspicion of theft of rice, spices from shops in the Mukkali area in Palakkad, Kerala. The Court sentenced 13 of the 14 convicted persons to...
The Special Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Mannarkkad convicted 14 of the 16 persons accused in the Madhu Lynching Case. The case pertains to death of a mentally challenged tribal youth, Madhu, who was lynched in February 2018, on suspicion of theft of rice, spices from shops in the Mukkali area in Palakkad, Kerala. The Court sentenced 13 of the 14 convicted persons to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years for the offence under Section 304 Part II (Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder) read with Section 149 (Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object) of the Indian Penal Code.
The Special Court Judge K.M. Retheesh Kumar while convicting 14 of the 16 persons accused in the lynching case observed:
“This is the first mob lynching case in Gods Own Country. Let it be last such case.”
Even though the counsel for the accused had requested for some leniency while awarding the sentence contending that several of the accused persons were sole bread winners of their family and that they had no criminal antecedents. The court observed that:
“This court is bound to respect the life of Madhu just like the life of any other citizen in this country. Our constitution guarantees equal right to life for each and every citizen in India irrespective of their social status. Hence, the court cannot award a flee bite sentence in this case for the reason that the person who died in the incident is not a big shot.”
Brief Facts of the Case
During 2017-2018, there were a series of petty thefts in Mukkali and Chindakki areas of Palakkad District which caused some concern among locals. Suspecting the victim Madhu to be behind these thefts, the accused persons entered the Aandiyallachaal reserve forest in search of Madhu. They confronted him and tied him up and proceeded to beat him up brutally. Later, they paraded him through the streets and brought him to Mukkali area and handed him over to the police. Even though the police took him to the hospital, the doctor found that Madhu was brought dead. The incident caused public uproar and grabbed media attention. An FIR was registered in relation to Madhu’s death. A final report was filed before the special court against 16 accused persons for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 294(b), 342, 352, 364, 367, 368 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1),(d)(r), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
Sentence Pronounced
Lamenting the death of the victim, at the hands of the accused persons, who had inflicted injuries on the victim on the mere suspicion of theft, the court observed:
“the accused persons have mercilessly inflicted injuries on Madhu alleging that he had committed some theft of food items in Mukkali and adjacent places. Even if it is assumed that the so called properties found in the custody of Madhu are stolen properties it can only be said that Madhu did not steal for the joy of it, but because of the clamor of his stomach. For that allegation of minor theft the acts done by the accused persons lead to the death of Madhu. “
The first accused was sentenced to 7 years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 304 Part II (Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder) read with Section 149 (Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object) of the IPC. He was also convicted under Section 143 (punishment for being a member of an unlawful assembly) Section 147 (punishment for rioting) Section 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) and Section 342 (Punishment for wrongful confinement) read with Section 149 of IPC.
Accused No.s.2, 3, 5 to 10 and 12 to 15 were sentenced to 7 years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 304 Part II (Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder) read with Section 149 (Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object) of the IPC. They were also convicted under Section 143, Section 147, Section 323, Section 324 (Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means), Section 326 (Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means), Section 342 , Section 367 (Kidnapping or abducting in order to subject person to grievous hurt, slavery, etc) read with Section 149 of the IPC. They were additionally convicted under Section 3(1)(d) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (garlands with footwear or parades naked or semi-naked a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe) read with Section 149 of IPC.
The 16th accused was convicted under Section 352 (Punishment for assault or criminal force otherwise than on grave provocation) of the IPC and sentenced to simple imprisonment of 3 months.
Terming it a case of moral policing the court observed:
“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. Therefore, it should be a lesson for all those who are thinking of assuming the role of moral police”
A fine of Rs. 1,05,000/- was imposed on the first accused and the remaining 12 accused persons have been imposed with a fine of Rs. 1,18,000/-.
While imposing the fine the court remarked that the loss suffered by the mother of the victim cannot be compensated with money:
“I find that considerably good amount is to be paid to the legal heirs of Madhu as compensation out of the fine amount. Therefore, I am not inclined to shower much leniency while imposing fine.”
The court also stated that if the fine amount is realised, 75% of it shall go to the legal heirs of Madhu as compensation under Section 357(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. 50% of this amount is to be paid to the mother of the victim, the court held. The court also directed the Chairman, District Legal Services Authority, Palakkad to award compensation to the legal heirs of the victim under the Victim Compensation Scheme, 2021.
The court also noted that the reason it did not impose the maximum sentence possible to the accused was because, it believed that the accused persons were capable of reforming themselves:
“the CCTV footages made available before the court reveal that accused no 3 has given a plantain to Madhu and accused no 14 has offered a cup of juice to Madhu when Madhu was brought to Mukkali. These acts of A3 and A 14 reveal that even now there exists remnants humanitarian consideration in the mind of the accused and hence the court find that chances of reforming the accused into a socially committed citizen cannot be ruled out. It is to be bear in mind that “every saint has a past and every sinner has a future”. For that reason and taking into account of 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 offence. “
No Motive To Kill
The court concluded that the motive of the crime was triggered by the many instances of theft in the area, and an apprehension among people that it was Madhu who was responsible for the same.
“Without having any convincing material or without having a finding by a competent court this court cannot brand Madhu as a habitual thief. But the prosecution evidence made available before court leads to a conclusion that there were a series of theft took place in these places”
The court held that circumstantial evidence would show that the series of thefts prompted the accused persons to confront Madhu believing him to be responsible for the same, and to torture him and inflict injuries.
The case of the prosecution was that the accused persons formed a unlawful assembly with the common object to murder Madhu. However, the court held that the common object of the assembly was only to cause injury/grievous hurt to the victim and entrust him to the police, however the impact of the injuries ultimately caused his death.
“Does any prudent man who wanted to kill a person will bring that person and entrust that person to Police by causing some injury ? Not at all. “ the court remarked.
If the accused persons intended to kill Madhu, they would have done so in the forest itself, where there was ample opportunity to do so. Instead, they brought him back to Mukkali, and handed him over to the police. This shows that they wanted to teach him a lesson for the alleged theft and did not intend to end his life, the court observed. Hence the actions of the accused persons would come under 304 part(ii) of IPC only as it does satisfy the requirements of the offence punishable under section 302 IPC, the court concluded.
Offences Under Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
The court held that the video clippings and CCTV footages would clearly show that Madhu was paraded in public half naked by the accused persons. For this, the court found them guilty of the offence punishable u/s.3(1) (d) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
“ It is to be noted that in order to attract offence punishable u/s. 3(1) (d) of SC/ST (POA) Act intention or knowledge are not warranted. The only thing that is required is mere parading of a member of SC/ST community in a naked or half naked manner by a person who does not belong to SC/ST community. “
However, the court held that the prosecution had failed to prove that the accused persons attacked Madhu, because he was a member of the Schedule Tribe community. The court held that Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the SC & ST (POA) Act would not apply as it requires knowledge regarding the caste of the victim. The court observed that though Madhu was a member of the SC/ST community, there was no evidence to show that the accused persons who attacked Madhu had the knowledge that he was a member of SC/ST community.
Simply because he was found in the forest by the accused persons or because of his dark complexion, it cannot be inferred that the accused persons knew he belonged to the Scheduled Tribe community. The motive behind the crime was the apprehension that Madhu had committed theft. The court was of the view that accused persons would have attacked Madhu whether he belonged to the ST community or some forward caste.
“In such circumstances, the court cannot infer from the circumstance that the accused persons were having the knowledge regarding the tribal identity of Madhu and with that knowledge the accused persons have attacked Madhu. “
Not A Case Of Custodial Violence
The main defence set up by the accused persons was that the cause of death of the victim was in fact custodial violence and that Madhu died as a result of police torture. However, the court refused to accept this contention as the doctor was of the view that if “all the injuries are taken together as a pattern these are not of a nature of custodial torture”. The postmortem examination revealed that the injuries inflicted on the body of the victim caused brain edema, which was caused 2-3 hours prior to his death. The edema which led to his death could only have been caused while Madhu was in the custody of the accused persons, the court concluded. According to the doctor the victim’s body contained injuries caused by spiky creepers which on examination were found in the forest where Madhu was beaten up by the accused. Based on expert evidence, it was held that the “pattern of injuries” rule out a case of Police torture.
Reliance on Electronic Evidence
Referring to CCTV footages related to the incident, the court noted that such important material cannot be ignored, especially in the light of several witnesses turning hostile:
“Can the court or accused persons say that the goddess of justice is blind folded and hence this court is not expected to see the CCTV footages and ascertain the role of A1 and find out the truth from the CCTV footages. It can never be. A1 can never deny these vital CCTV footages as he is also heavily relying on it. The court is expected to examine all these materials placed before the court and arrive at a right conclusion. “
The court referred to the decision of the High Court in Sherin V John V State of Kerala 2018 (3) KHC 725 on the reliability of CCTV footages “I find that the CCTV footages are to be treated as silent witnesses. These witnesses will not support anyone. This will remain as an independent and impartial silent witness.”
While considering the reliability of electronic evidence presented by the prosecution, which included several video and photos taken by the accused persons themselves during the course of the incident, the court also observed that :
“Due to the advancement of technology the day to day life became impossible by totally ignoring these electronic devices and hence nowadays the Investigating Agency is primarily relying on these electronic evidence such as CCTV footages, mobile phones etc. for proving criminal cases and in fact such practice is to be encouraged due to the advancement of technology. “
On Witnesses Turning Hostile
During the course of the trial several prosecution witnesses including close relatives of the victim turned hostile. The court observed that while granting bail to the accused persons, one of the conditions imposed by the High Court was that they would not contact the witnesses. However, the call records produced by the prosecution revealed that several accused persons, were in contact with many of the witnesses:
“It is to be noted that many of the accused persons have kept regular contact with these witnesses. Can it be said that these accused persons have contacted the witnesses for discussing about foreign policy of Government of India or about next Parliament election ? Never. It can only be said that these accused persons have contacted these witnesses only for the purpose of winning over the case, that too by violating the specific order passed by the Honourable High Court of Kerala.”
The court observed that the many witnesses even blatantly denied their own visuals in the CCTV footages and videos produced. Though the witnesses turning hostile did not adversely affect the trial, the court directed proceedings under Section 340 CrPC to be initiated against the hostile witnesses:
“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.”
Appreciation For The Media
The court concluded the judgment by placing on record its special appreciation to the media for bringing attention to the death of Madhu and paving the way for rendering justice:
“Perhaps, had the media not given importance to this news, this case would not have ended like this. In fact, the highlight given by the media to this incident has expedited the authorities to take dynamic measures in handling this case. The court acknowledges the role of media for being instrumental in rendering justice to Madhu.”