Gokulraj Murder Case: Madras High Court Judges Set To Visit Temple Premises Where Accused Was Last Seen

Two judges of the Madras High Court, Justice MS Ramesh and Justice Anand Venkatesh are set to visit the Tiruchengode Arthanareeswarar temple from where Gokulraj was kidnapped and later murdered.

Gokulraj, a Dalit youth who was 21 years old at the time of his death, was abducted from the temple on June 23, 2015. The next day, his body was found with his head severed. It was later found that Gokulraj was killed by members of a fringe outfit for having a relationship with an upper-caste woman. A special court in Madurai had found Yuvraj, leader of Dheeran Chinnamalai Peravai, as the prime accused and convicted him along with nine others and sentenced them to life imprisonment in March 2022.

While hearing the appeals preferred against the conviction, the High Court bench has now decided to inspect the temple property to understand the topography of the place. They are set to visit the temple on January 22. 

Since the prosecution heavily relied on the last seen theory, and since the topography sketches produced before the court did not disclose the exact location of CCTV cameras, the court noted that such inspection would be helpful in understanding the temple property, checking the entrance and exit points, and seeing the location of the CCTV cameras. 

"We can't write orders on emotions. We have to satisfy ourselves with respect to the link between the place and the crime," Justice Anand Venkatesh had said earlier.

The court had earlier initiated a suo moto contempt proceeding against the prime witness in the case for making false statements under oath. It had stated that such conduct of the witnesses shakes the public confidence in the judiciary and thus the court has the authority to initiate contempt proceedings against such witness to ensure proper administration of justice.

The court is set to continue hearing the appeals on January 27..

Case Title: Yuvraj v The Additional Superintendent of Police and others

Case No: Crl A (MD) 228 of 2022