In a pivotal judgment, the Kerala High Court has made a significant decision regarding the suspension of sentences in the infamous Madhu lynching case. Madhu, a mentally challenged tribal youth, was brutally beaten to death in Palakkad’s Attapady in February 2018, after being accused of stealing rice from a grocery shop.
The Division Bench, comprising Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice P.G. Ajithkumar, addressed the pleas of 13 convicts seeking suspension of their sentences. The court rejected the suspension of sentence for 12 out of these 13 convicts, considering the heinous nature of their act. The bench observed,
“The act of the accused left a blot on the social conscience and the cultural fabric of the society.”
It was noted that these accused individuals had paraded the deceased naked on the public road, adding to the humiliation and brutality of the act. The court also took into account that the accused persons had threatened the mother of the deceased while denying the suspension of sentence.
However, the court granted suspension of sentence and bail to Hussain (1st accused), distinguishing his involvement from the others. The bench stated,
“In the case of the 1st accused, there is a difference. The very allegation against him is that he joined the other assailants after the deceased was already captured him in custody and kept under confinement. Based on a solitary act that he stamped the deceased and as a consequence his head hit against a wall resulting in head injury, and that turned out to be a major cause of the death, he was found guilty. When there is no allegation that he was a party to the assembly that perpetrated harassment and ridiculing of the deceased, a different criteria is liable to be taken in his case.”
The accused were convicted under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC/ST Act). The sentences for the offenses ranged, with the longest being seven years of rigorous imprisonment under Sections 304 and 326 of the IPC.
This case, titled Marakkar v State of Kerala, underscores the Kerala High Court’s approach to dealing with mob violence and its repercussions on society. The court’s decision to differentiate between the roles of the accused reflects a careful and nuanced approach to justice, ensuring that each individual’s actions are evaluated based on their specific involvement in the crime. The ruling not only addresses the immediate case but also sends a strong message about the consequences of such heinous acts.
