Last-seen theory valid only if time gap is small: Tamil Nadu sessions court

Though the death was proved to be homicidal, the prosecution could not provide any evidence to establish the motive or produce eyewitnesses to the crime.
Image used for representational purposes only.
Image used for representational purposes only.Express Illustration
Updated on
2 min read

CHENNAI: Though the ‘last seen’ theory is effective to nail perpetrators in a murder case, it can be used only when the time gap between the point when the deceased and accused were last seen together, and the deceased found dead, is small enough.

Using this dictum laid out by higher courts, a Kancheepuram district sessions court, on April 7, acquitted three men accused of murdering their friend, near Manimangalam, around 50 km from Chennai, in March 2013.

As per evidence in the case, the court found two of the accused took the deceased on their bike on March 20, and his body was found two days later.

The court said the police would have to prove in court that no other person had come in contact with the deceased during the two days, which could justify convicting the accused for the crime. “In the absence of such evidence, it is not safe to hand out a conviction on the basis of the theory, “ the court added.

The case pertains to the murder of Suresh allegedly by his friends - Vinayagam, Kathavarayan and Rajesh - sometime in the third week of March in 2013.

During the trial, the Manimangalam police said Suresh was murdered as Vinayagam and Kathavarayan had a previous enmity due to a land deal. The duo had picked up Suresh on a bike, and it was seen by the latter’s wife. Two days later, he was found dead in a forest area nearby with a cut injury on his neck.

Though the death was proved to be homicidal, the prosecution could not provide any evidence to establish the motive or produce eyewitnesses to the crime. In fact, though two inspectors investigated the case, neither of them was examined in court by the prosecution. Witnesses who were present during the recording of confession and recovery of the weapons used in the crime had turned hostile.

After disposing with these matters, the court took cognisance of the circumstantial evidence available on record, which was that the two accused were last seen with the deceased.

However, quoting the Supreme Court verdict in the Dharam Deo Yadav vs State of Uttar Pradesh case and the Madras High Court judgment in Yuvaraj vs State, the court pointed out the last-seen theory could not be used to convict the accused in this case.

Evidence

As per evidence in the case, the court found two of the accused took the deceased on their bike, and his body was found two days later. The court said the police would have to prove that no other person had come in contact with the deceased during the two days

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
Open in App
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com