Shocking acquittal

Sir,- It was shocking to see the acquittal of the accused by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in the Navarasu murder case. The reason that ``circumstantial evidence'' was insufficient to convict the accused is untenable.

The apex court has reiterated that in case of circumstantial evidence the chain of events must be linked in toto. In this connection, I would like to quote the case of R v/s Robinson, a well known English case where the accused was convicted purely on circumstantial evidence.

The honourable judges should have viewed what the impact of the acquittal would be on society. The acquittal will totally erode the objective of the enactment being made to curb ragging.

``Presumption of innocence'' is the golden thread passing through the web of the criminal law jurisprudence in our country. But I do not think that ``innocence'' should be extended to this extent. Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, gives inherent powers to the High Court to meet the ends of justice. If this is so the High Court should have looked into the evidence vis-a-vis the trial court's decision.

S. S. Venkat Subramanian,

Chennai

* * *

Sir,- Having been in the Annamalai University campus as a student during that turbulent period when the brutal murder was committed, I feel let down by the judgment. Soon after the murder came to light, a Sri Lankan daily is said to have written in its editorial: ``Thank God, ragging is not as severe in our country as in India where students are murdered.''

V. Balasubramanian,

Porayar, T.N.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : De Gaulle example
Next     : Through the haze of war