Terms TP murder cold-blooded, pre-planned, brutal
The Special Additional Sessions Court (Marad cases) has said that the motive for killing Revolutionary Marxist Party leader T.P. Chandrasekharan “was political animosity.”
The first seven accused — M.C. Anoop, Manoj Kumar aka Kirmani Manoj, N.K. Sunil Kumar aka Kodi Suni, T.K. Rajeesh, K.K. Mohammed Shafi, Annan Shijith, and K. Shinoj — “were tools in the hands of the persons who entertained political enmity towards the deceased. But political murders are not uncommon in Kerala.”
The court said the murder was cold-blooded, pre-planned, and brutal. “The motive of the crime was not personal enmity. The manner in which the murder was committed reveals extreme depravity. The action of the accused was inhuman, ruthless and barbaric. It shocks not only the judicial conscience but the collective conscience of society. ”
However, R. Narayana Pisharadi, judge, observed that the case would not fall under the category of the rarest of rare cases and that death penalty was not warranted against the accused. “It needs mention here that though death penalty is not warranted in the case, the court would have opted for making a direction that accused one to seven shall serve a minimum period of 20 years in jail without remission. However, in view of the decision of the Kerala High Court, this court has no power to make such a direction.”
On life sentence
The court also observed that there was a misconception that a prisoner serving a life sentence had an indefeasible right to be released on completion of either 14 or 20 years’ imprisonment.
“The prisoner has no such right. A convict undergoing life imprisonment is expected to remain in custody till the end of his life, subject to any remission granted by the appropriate government under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.”
It mentioned that the murder of Chandrasekharan had created a sensation in the State.
‘Media impact nil’
“The sensational nature of the case does not make any impact on the mind of the court in the sentencing process. Heat generated outside the court room either through the news media or through flutter in the public shall not affect the cause of justice,” the court said.