After 18 yrs, duo found not guilty of robbing Rs 80

CHENNAI: Accused of robbing Rs 80 and a wristwatch from a man under knifepoint to buy their morning tiffin in February 2004, D Madhan and K Munusamy, then in their early 20s were arrested within hours of the alleged waylaying. Eighteen years after the arrest, the two of them were found not guilty last week by a sessions court in Chennai, which took a stringent view on the “flaws and discrepancies” in the investigation by Teynampet police.

The case first came up before the metropolitan magistrate court, Saidapet in December 2006 and was then transferred to the city civil court.

According to the prosecution, B Kathir of Ganesapuram, Teynampet, was walking along Cenotaph Road-Chittaranjan Road junction around 9 am on February 26, 2004, when he was waylaid by Madhan and Munusamy.

KPS Devaraj, who was then the Teynampet police inspector stated in his deposition that he arrested both the accused in SM Nagar, Teynampet, the same day and both the accused had voluntarily given their confessions. The stolen money was used to buy tiffin, while the watch was recovered from the thatch roof of an eatery. The knife allegedly used to intimidate and inflict small injury on the victim was thrown into the Coovum river by the accused, according to the submission of Devaraj, who is now an additional superintendent of police in Villupuram.

During the trial, the accused denied the charges against them. The sessions judge, perusing the submissions and documents noted that the prosecution did not take proper steps even for the identification of the accused to connect with this crime

“This case is pending from the year 2006. Even then, the prosecution could not produce witnesses to prove their case,” J Chandran, V additional sessions judge stated and acquitted both of them.

One of the accused is a low-level functionary of a political party now, according to advocate P Surendran who appeared for them. “In fact, both the accused did not know each other at the time of arrest,” Surendran told DT Next casting doubts on the prosecution theory that they were partners in crime. According to the lawyer, the accused had spent close to Rs 10,000 in litigation expenses.