New DelhiTrained witnesses, embellished evidence, omissions and omissions by the prosecution, lack of case diaries, and insufficient evidence – these were some of the reasons cited by a Kerala High Court bench to acquit 13 RSS workers in 14 years – old massacre
On 12 July, Justice K. A bench of Justices Vinod Chandran and C. Jayachandran overturned a 2016 lower court order that had convicted 13 RSS workers in the 2008 murder of CPI(M) worker Vishnu over “political rivalry”.
However, the HC’s decision declared that the prosecution “failed miserably to prove the objectionable circumstances against the accused”, made “unfounded” allegations of conspiracy, and “clearly taught” the witnesses.
Acknowledging the “intrigue, malice and deceit” of the political rivalry, and acknowledging the division between “red and those saffron-clad men”, the court nonetheless referred to the prosecution’s case as “projecting half-truths”. Rejected as a “deliberate attempt”. ,
The decision came after a 2016 appeal by RSS workers against their conviction by an additional sessions court in Thiruvananthapuram. The court had sentenced 11 accused to double life imprisonment, one to life imprisonment and one to three years in jail.
read also, Kerala RSS workers acquitted of murder by HC, Sangh and CPI(M), alleging ‘false’ cases
2008 murder
On April 1, 2008, a CPI(M) worker named Vishnu was murdered near the passport office at Kaithamukku in Thiruvananthapuram city. he was the first Nominated In a “country bomb” attack on the RSS office in the city.
The FIR included an eyewitness account of a person assisting passport applicants, who worked nearby. He reported hearing a commotion and when he came out, he said, he saw Vishnu being attacked by four or five attackers with swords and helicopters. Witnesses said the attackers fled on three bikes after seriously injuring Vishnu.
The matter was heard in 2016. Prosecutors built their case on the allegation that since 2001, there have been numerous instances of political violence. It was also alleged that all the members of the RSS had hatched a “criminal conspiracy” to kill Vishnu.
test was That which has been completed In seven months, during which 77 witnesses were cross-examined, and 162 documents and 65 physical evidence were examined.
In December of that year, the accused were found guilty of various offenses – including conspiracy, unlawful assembly, rioting with deadly weapons, murder and possession of explosives.
The trial court held that both the conspiracy and the motive were proved by the testimony of the witnesses. The trial court had earlier also cited instances of political conflict between two political organisations.
An appeal to HC
Following the conviction, the counsel for the RSS workers appealed to the Kerala High Court, arguing that the investigation had been “tainted” from the beginning. In the appeal, it was alleged that the prosecution “engineered” its case as Vishnu was a member of the ruling CPI(M) at the time of his death.
The appellants argued that the case put up by the prosecution was full of discrepancies and irregularities. He also pointed out “procedural lapses” in the Trial Identification Parade (TIP) and discrepancies in the statements of witnesses.
In its rebuttal, the prosecution explained the “three parts” of its case – conspiracy, assault and escape.
It told the court that eyewitnesses gave statements that some of the accused had gone to the crime scene from the RSS. office (office), were “natural and trustworthy”. In addition, there was a “reasonable estimate of the plot”, including those who were not actively involved in the attack.
It was argued that there could be no direct evidence of the conspiracy as it was always secretly hatched.
The prosecution also said that it had conducted the TIP in accordance with the guidelines and that “substantial corroboration” had been obtained for the witnesses’ accounts from the recovery of vehicles, weapons and clothing of the accused.
However, the High Court pointed out several inaccuracies in the statement of the prosecution.
‘No evidence worth its salt’
In its detailed judgment this Tuesday, the Kerala High Court hit no punches.
“From the commencement of the investigation, there appears to be a deliberate attempt to present half-truths and cherry-pick witnesses so as to give shape to the case in a particular manner,” the court said.
It pointed out that “omissions and contradictions” in the testimony of eyewitnesses raised questions about the veracity of the prosecution’s “story”.
After analysis of the evidence and arguments given by both the parties, the HC felt that the alleged conspiracy scene was not clearly addressed in the police chargesheet.
“The plot scene was told in an RSS” office, whose location is not clear from the final report. no scene moneylender or the site plan was drawn up and in spite of the search carried out inside the so-called officeNothing objectionable was found,” the HC bench said.
It further alleged that, because of this, the prosecution “taught” some witnesses to speak about a gathering outside the RSS office, “realizing that if the conspiracy was alleged to take place inside closed doors”. cannot talk about the identity of the witness. persons, as has been done now”.
The HC said it could not “give credence” to the testimony of the witnesses, who could only get a “momentary glimpse” of the speeding bike from the place where they were told. The court held that it was unlikely that they could clearly see the “conspirators” to identify them eight years later.
With regard to the trial identification parade, the court said that no weight can be added to it as due procedures are not followed. There was “obvious evidence”, the court said, adding that the witnesses were called to the police station just before or after TIP’s request.
The court said there was “every chance the witnesses were given the details of the accused” or the photographs available at the police station before the TIP were shown.
The HC also noted that some of the witnesses’ details of weapons and clothing of the attackers during their investigation in the trial court were different from what they had stated earlier in their statements to the police.
The witnesses who were brought in to speak on all “three parts” of the cases were deemed by the court to be “taught and imposed for the purpose of bringing home the offense against the accused”.
Sanjali Saxena is a student at Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, and an intern with ThePrint
(Edited by Aswari Singh)
Read also: Out of Jail in 2030 – How Abu Salem Inspired India to Honor Its Promises to Portugal