7 months ago
2
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has directed 3 constabulary unit attached to Thideer Nagar constabulary presumption successful Madurai to jointly wage a compensation of ₹10 lakh to a antheral for conspiring to get him convicted successful a ganja lawsuit by giving mendacious grounds earlier the proceedings court.
Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan directed the constabulary unit — Panaraj, Senthilkumar and Mohammed Idris — to jointly wage the compensation. The tribunal besides directed the Director General of Police to behaviour an enquiry into their conduct.
The tribunal was proceeding an entreaty filed by A. Vignesh, 1 of the accused successful the case. According to the prosecution, connected June 26, 2021, 7 accused, including 1 juvenile, were recovered successful possession of 24 kg of ganja adjacent Melavasal. The First Additional Special Court for NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, sentenced the appellant to 10-year rigorous imprisonment. Vignesh challenged the judgment.
His counsel submitted that but the confession of the co-accused, nary worldly was placed earlier the proceedings tribunal to beryllium the information of the appellant successful the alleged crime. The beingness of the appellant successful the country of occurrence was doubtful connected the grounds that his signature was not obtained successful the betterment mahazar, it was submitted.
Justice Ramakrishnan observed that a just probe and a just proceedings was a cardinal close of the accused. The elemental confession of the co-accused was not capable to convict the appellant. Even arsenic per the prosecution case, nary betterment was made from the appellant. The betterment was made lone from the archetypal accused.
In the lack of immoderate factual worldly to beryllium the beingness of the appellant astatine the spot of occurrence with the cognition that the main accused possessed ganja, the tribunal was not inclined to convict him.
The tribunal observed that successful the lawsuit of recovery, betterment mahazar was a captious document. To beryllium the beingness of the appellant astatine the country of occurrence, the serviceman should person obtained the signature of the appellant successful the betterment mahazar. The lack of signature created a doubt. If the lawsuit of prosecution was that the accused refused to motion successful the betterment mahazar it should beryllium proved.
The tribunal was inclined to judge the statement of the counsel for the appellant that a mendacious lawsuit was registered against him, the tribunal observed, acceptable speech the proceedings tribunal judgement and acquitted the appellant of each charges.
