Special Court for SC-ST (PoA) Act Judge K.M. Retheesh Kumar, who issued the verdict of the sensational Madhu lynching case, has observed that it should be the last lynching case in Kerala.
“This is the first mob lynching case in God’s own country. Let it be the last such case. The materials placed before the court reveal that the accused have assumed the role of moral police. Such moral policing can never be encouraged in a civilised society,” said judge Retheesh Kumar.
The judgment said that unless such moral policing was deprecated by awarding adequate sentences, this practice will be repeated by like-minded people. “It should be a lesson for all those who are thinking of assuming the role of moral police,” observed the judge.
Flak for police
The verdict also warned the police against laxity in taking action on complaints, particularly theft. Had the police apprehended Madhu following complaints of theft raised against him, he could have been brought before law and he could have been treated and rehabilitated at the State expense, Mr. Retheesh Kumar observed.
“This incident is a lesson to the police force in our State, reminding them that no complaint should be left unattended and all such complaints should be taken seriously. If the police play blind attention to complaints of theft taking into account of the value involved therein, that will result in developing a tendency of moral policing among the society. I find that this unfortunate incident is a lesson for the police force also,” the judge said.
The court held a sympathetic view of the allegations of theft against Madhu. “Even if it is assumed that the so-called properties found in the custody of Madhu were stolen ones, it can only be said that Madhu did not steal for the joy of it, but because of the clamour of his stomach,” the court observed.
Mr. Retheesh Kumar underscored that Madhu’s life should be respected just like the life of any other citizen. “The court cannot award a flea-bite sentence in this case for the reason that the person who died is not a big shot.”
He also considered the act of kindness displayed by some of the accused even when they captured, detained, manhandled and insulted Madhu. Two of the accused had given Madhu a cup of juice and a plantain when he was brought to Mukkali.
“It is to be borne in mind that ‘every saint has a past and every sinner has a future’. Even now there exists remnants humanitarian consideration in the mind of the accused,” the judge observed.
Praise for media
Praising the media for consistent coverage the case, the judge observed that had the media not given importance to the news, the case would have had a different ending.
“The the highlight given by the media to this incident has expedited the authorities to take dynamic measures in handling this case. The court acknowledges the role of media for being instrumental in rendering justice to Madhu,” he said.
Witness hostility
The judgment expressed a serious concern at the hostility displayed by 24 eye-witnesses during the trial.
“Even a close relative of Madhu turned hostile to the prosecution case. Some of the witnesses dared to blindly deny their own visuals in CCTV, mobile phones etc. when played in court, even though the visuals were crystal clear. Though this disgusting factor has not materially affected the finding of the court, it is unfair to encourage such practice of prime witnesses turning hostile to the prosecution case so as to subvert the judicial system,” the judge observed, recommending legal action against the hostile witnesses under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C.
