The Kerala High Court has acquitted five RSS/BJP workers who were arraigned as accused and convicted in the case relating to the attempt to murder CPI(M) leader P. Jayarajan at his Kathirur residence, near Thalassery, in August 1999.
Justice P. Somarajan passed the verdict recently while allowing the appeals filed by the five convicts — Para Sasi, Elamthottathil Manoj, Jayaprakasan, Kadichery Aji alias Ajith Kumar, Koyyom Manu alias Manoj, against the order of the Thalassery Sessions Court in 2007. The court also dismissed the appeal filed by the State government against the acquittal of three other accused — Kuniyil Shanoob, Kovveri Pramod and Thykandny Mohan. The fifth and eighth accused had passed away while the appeal was pending and nobody turned up to represent them.
The court, however, upheld the conviction of the second accused, Chirukandoth Prasanth, in the case. But the court reduced the ten-year rigorous imprisonment awarded to him to one year simple imprisonment, observing that the ten years imprisonment did not reflect the proper balance.
The court observed that there was failure on the part of the prosecution to show and prove the involvement of accused in the alleged commission of offence, the very case advanced by the victim in the box, especially pertaining to an attack by a politically motivated mob, requires the standard of proof pointing towards the guilt of each and every accused and their involvement. Mere suspicion cannot be substituted in the place of proof. Hence, benefit of doubt goes to the accused who had filed the appeals.
The prosecution submitted that what was involved was a very serious offence, which was the result of political enmity between two factions of CPI (M) on one side and RSS and BJP on the other side.
The counsel for the accused submitted that the second witness, who is the wife of the victim Jayarajan, is a planted witness. Her presence in the place of incident was highly improbable. It was evident from the fact that the alleged incident had happened inside the family house of her husband. Two country bombs explode during the attack on the victim. However, the wife did not sustain any injury. The court also noted that her dress was neither recovered nor any evidence produced to show that there were blood stains on her dress.
The presence of another witness —the sister of the victim — was also doubtful. The dress worn by her was not seized. She did not sustain any injury and no such case was advanced. The version given by the neighbours, who are witnesses, was inconsistent and, hence could not be relied on.
