BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.
Krishnakumar @ Kanthan & Others - Appellant
Versus
State Represented by The Additional Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram - Respondent
CRL.A (MD). No. 359 of 2018 Crl.M.P. (MD) Nos. 6343 to 6345 of 2018
Decided On : 21-06-2022
LTTE - Conviction under various sections of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Passport Act, 1967, Foreigners Act 1946, and Indian Penal Code - Sections 10(a)(i), (iv), 38(1), 3(a) r/w 12(1)(a), 14(c), 419 - The court confirmed the conviction and reduced the sentence from 10 years to 7 years Rigorous Imprisonment based on the appellants' undertaking to leave India and not engage in law and order problems.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted for various offences related to their involvement with the LTTE, including possession of cyanide capsules and chemicals, preparation to revive the LTTE, and illegal activities under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Passport Act, 1967, Foreigners Act 1946, and Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court confirmed the conviction and reduced the sentence based on the appellants' undertaking to leave India and not engage in law and order problems.
Issues: The main issues were the sufficiency of evidence, validity of prosecution sanction, and the involvement of the appellants in the alleged conspiracy and illegal activities.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the prosecution had presented ample evidence to establish the appellants' involvement in the alleged offences. The court also determined that proper sanction had been obtained for prosecuting the appellants under the relevant acts.
Final Decision: The court confirmed the conviction and reduced the sentence from 10 years to 7 years Rigorous Imprisonment based on the appellants' undertaking to leave India and not engage in law and order problems.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C, to call for the judgment dated 28.04.2018 made in S.C.No.7 of 2016, on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram and set aside the same.)
1. The Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence imposed on the appellants/accused – A.1, A.3 and A.4 in S.C.No.7 of 2016, dated 28.04.2018, on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Ramanathapuram.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 20.07.2015 at 08.30p.m., on receiving a secret information about the movement of LTTE cadres, Q Branch CID Inspector Kennedy and his party organised vehicle check up at Uchipuli bus stand, that the said police party intercepted a white TATA Indigo Car bearing Registration No.TN-07-BK-3574 proceeding from Ramanathapuram towards Rameswaram and found the first accused – Krishnamumar and the third accused – Rajendran seated in the car and the second accused – Sasikumar was on the wheel, that during the search, 75 Cyanide capsules, 600grams chemicals meant for manufacture of cyanide, 4 GPS, 6 mobile phones, Indian Currency of Rs. 46,200/-, Sri Lankan currency of Rs.19,300/-, one sovereign gold chain, Sri Lankan National ID card, one ATM card of IOB, Driving licences issued at India and Sri Lanka were seized from the possession of the first accused Krishnakumar, that two mobile phones, SBI passbook, Voter ID card and Aadhar Card along with the TATA Indigo Car were recovered from the second accused Sasikumar, that one mobile phone was seized from the third accused Rajendran and that the Inspector of Police Kennedy preferred a special report and produced the accused along with the seized items to the Inspector of Police – S.K.Ramesh, Q Branch CID, Ramanathapuram District and on that basis, FIR came to be registered in Cr.No.1 of 2015 for the offences under Sections 10(a)(i), (iv) and 38(1) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Section 3(a) r/w 12(1) (a) of the Passport Act, 1967, Section 3 and 14(c) of the Foreigners Act 1946, Section 6 of the Poisons Act, 1919 and Section 419 I.P.C.
3. It is the further case of the prosecution that the Inspector of Police, Trichy Q Branch CID had conducted a search at the residence of the first accused – Krishnakumar at No.5, 1st Main road, Renga Nagar, K.K.Nagar, Trichy-21 on 21.07.2015 at about 16.00hours and seized driving licence, Sri Lankan Passport, Karur Vysya Bank passbook, Aadhar card, photos of Prabhakaran and Thileeban, certificate issued to the first accused in the name of Kanthan for visiting Mullivaikkal Muttram at Thanjavur along with Laptop, two DVD and camera memory card.
4. It is the further case of the prosecution that the first accused in his confession had disclosed about the fourth accused Subhaskaran @ Jeevan @ Raja @ Prabha who was allegedly helping in transacting the funds collected through illegal means from the sympathizers of LTTE living in foreign countries, that the said fourth accused Subhaskaran was arrested on 25.07.2015 at 23.00hours and during the course of search, two cell phones, Indian Currency of Rs.10,355/-, Naam Tamilar Katchi visiting card containing photos of Prabhakaran and Seeman, one pen drive, one 8 GB memory card, two sim cards, one black colour diary and non-camp refugee certificate, route map showing their rival camps in Sri Lanka, Hit list containing the names of Sri Lankan Tamil leaders, note books and a travel bag were seized, that the fourth accused Subhaskaran was an active cadre in LTTE and well trained by the LTTE in weapon handling, that the Q branch CID, Chennai City police had conducted a search at the residence of the fourth accused-Subhaskaran at No.1/145, Bajanai Kovil Street, Uthandi, Chennai on 26.07.2015 and that two hard discs, one electronic travel ticket, birth certificate, aadhar card, one hand written article on the history of Eelam, 10 pages printed article on the history of Eelam, diary, Karur Vysya
The main legal point established in the judgment is the sufficiency of evidence to establish the appellants' involvement in the alleged offences and the validity of prosecution sanction under the rel....
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the appellant's conspiracy to revive a banned organization, supported by credible witness testimonies and recovered incriminating materials.
The dropping of charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act against the appellant and the principles of speedy trial and personal liberty were central legal points established in the judgm....
In criminal trials, identification of an accused through aliases introduced long after investigation, without a Test Identification Parade or corroborative evidence, is insufficient to support a conv....
The court found that the allegations against the appellant did not meet the definition of a 'Terrorist Act' and there were no reasonable grounds for believing the accusations were prima facie true.
The appellate court emphasized that sentences for distinct charges should not run concurrently when involving serious allegations such as terrorism, underscoring the necessity of reflecting the crime....
The court established that involvement with a banned terrorist organization and the collection of levies for such groups constitutes serious offenses under the UA(P) Act, warranting denial of bail wh....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.