Political Parties Must 'Finish' Opponents On Electoral Battlefield, Norm Of Attacking Rivals Must Be Strictly Dealt With: Kerala High Court

Justice C.S. Sudha observed that the Court cannot show leniency imposed upon the accused persons since that would send a wrong message to society which would only encourage such crimes. The Court called the attack on Sadanandan Master as brutal, dastardly and near fatal attack and stated that he has been waiting for justice for the past 31 years.

Court stated, “It seems to have become the norm of the day of some to silence political opponents by either killing or maiming them severely for the rest of their life. If this is not intolerance, then what is? This sort of activity by any person, let alone a political party can at no cost be encouraged and such offences will have to be dealt with an iron hand. Political parties have to deal with or finish their political opponents in the electoral battlefield and not engage in bloodshed and remove the opponents from the face of the earth itself.”

Background

The prosecution case is that twelve persons who were all CPI(M) workers and local leaders formed an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons, wrongfully restrained Sadanandan Master and hacked him several times as a result of which his legs were severed. Later, the accused persons threw a country bomb made to create terror and panic so that no one would help the victim.

The motive as alleged by the prosecution was that Sadanandan Master It is alleged that the accused and other Marxist workers were hostile against him for joining the RSS.

The Sessions Court, Thalassery found eight persons guilty and convicted them to imprisonment of seven years under Sections 143, 147, 326, 342 and 307 IPC. Three accused were also convicted under Section 148 of the IPC. The Court imposed a fine of Rupees 25,000 (Rs 5,000 under Section 326 and Rs 20,000 under Section 307) upon the accused which has to be paid to Sadanandan Master as compensation.

The order was upheld by the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Thalassery.

The High Court was considering a criminal revision petition filed by eight accused persons challenging the conviction and sentence imposed by the Sessions Court. The Court was also considering the criminal appeal filed by Sadanandan Master challenging the inadequacy of the sentence imposed upon the eight appellants and aggrieved by the acquittal of four persons.

Findings

The Court observed that Sadanandan Master did not challenge the acquittal, inadequacy of compensation and inadequacy of sentence before the Sessions Court. It also noted that only the State could challenge the inadequacy of the sentence. As such, the Court held that the appeal filed by Sadanandan Master was not maintainable and dismissed it.

Considering the testimony of witnesses and evidence on record, the Court stated that there was no illegality in the order of the Trial Court, which was also rightly upheld by the Sessions Court. The Court stated that the accused persons deserve no leniency and that their actions resulted in the amputation of the legs of Sadanandan Master when he was only 27 years old.

Court stated, “I do not think that the accused persons deserve any sort of leniency in the light of the overt acts committed by them. The incident did not happen in a fit of rage/anger or on a sudden provocation. The attack seems to have been premeditated and well planned…. The attack seems to have been made only because PW1 switched loyalty and joined a rival party. In paragraph no.33 of the trial court judgment it is stated that PW1 a charismatic and efficient leader was making his mark in the locality and his efforts helped in spreading and strengthening the roots of his party in the area. The accused persons belonging to a rival political party just could not accept/digest it.”

As such, the Court confirmed the imprisonment and increased the fine amount to 50,000 rupees for each of the accused. 

Case Title: Sadanandan v State of Kerala & Connected Case

Case No: CRA(V) NO. 309 OF 2014 & Connected Case

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 116

Click here to Read/Download Order