Tamil Nadu - Madurai   

Convict argues case and gets acquitted

MADURAI: Convict No. 16525 of Tiruchi Central Prison was an elated man on Tuesday for he achieved what his lawyers could not. The 42-year-old appeared before the Madras High Court Bench here with armed escort, argued his case in person and got himself acquitted of all charges.

J. John alias Rajendran hailing from Sundararajapuram in Rajapalayam taluk of Virudhunagar district was arrested by the ‘Q’ Branch police near Ramanathapuram new bus stand on July 21, 2001, for allegedly possessing 100 grams of brown sugar containing 20 per cent heroin.

He was booked under various provisions of the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. A Special Court for Essential Commodities Act and NDPS Act cases at Pudukottai convicted him on December 12, 2007, and sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment, besides imposing a fine of Rs.5,000.

The convict filed an appeal against the conviction in 2008 through his counsel who also filed a sub-application to suspend his sentence pending adjudication of the criminal appeal. However, the High Court dismissed the sub-application seeking suspension of sentence and refused to let the convict out on bail.

Aggrieved over the dismissal, the convict wrote a letter to the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court on September 2, 2009, stating that he had lost confidence in his lawyers. He sought permission to argue the appeal on his own and urged the court to issue summons to facilitate his appearance before it.

Accordingly, he was produced before Justice P. Murgesen who initially tried to persuade the convict to engage a counsel through the Legal Aid. Mr. John politely declined to accept the offer and told the judge that he was thorough with the provisions of the NDPS Act as well as the facts of the case in order to secure an acquittal.

Claiming that he was falsely implicated in the case, he argued that the prosecution case could not be believed as the seizure report stated that the narcotic substance was a dry powder whereas a receipt issued by the forensic officials described it to be a powder with high moisture content.

The convict also cited discrepancies in the evidence adduced by the witnesses in the case and said that the mandatory procedures to be followed while seizure of narcotic substances were not complied with in the present case.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Water level
Convict argues case and gets acquitted
Chettinad belt emerging as a major tourist attraction
Scholarship test to be held at three centres in Madurai
Meet on geriatric orthopaedics
Mind-boggling questions and astonishing answers
Sudden change in traffic system draws flak
Meet to discuss gold price
21-day refresher course for teachers at university
Special medical camp at Mela Ponnagaram
Madurai today

Copyright © 2009, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu