MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has observed that the Courts are answerable to the victims in murder cases.
The observation was made while dismissing a petition filed by a gangster, Saba, alias Sabarathinam, seeking to suspend a 14-year jail term imposed on him in an NDPS case. Several other cases, including those on murder against him, were pending as he was not presented for trial by the police, fearing he would be released on bail by the court.
Justice B Pugalendhi made the significant remarks while hearing a petition filed by Saba to dismiss the sentence imposed by the Special Court for Essential Commodities and NDPS Act cases in Madurai in February 2024.
Saba is an A+ category history-sheeter and a notorious gang leader in Madurai. He allegedly leads an organised criminal gang in Madurai, where his rival is a gang from Vellaikalai. Out of the 23 pending cases of Saba, seven are of murder.
The court also noticed that the cases registered against him from 2015 to 2017 are still pending.
The court had ordered the IGP, South Zone, Madurai, and the Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, to file a report regarding the reasons for not holding trials against him.
The IGP had submitted that a Special Monitoring Team has been set up for day-to-day monitoring of the trial proceedings and to expedite the trial in the three murder cases in Ramanathapuram. The Commissioner had submitted that for three other murder cases in the city limits, the petitioner and the co-accused are not cooperating with the trial proceedings and are habitually absconding, which has led to the persistent delay in the trials.
After these submissions, the court said the cases, as far back as 2015, have been pending for more than 10 years for want of appearance of the accused.
“The courts are also answerable to the victims in murder cases, wherein the right to life of those victims was allegedly taken away by the petitioner and other accused. The apprehension of the police is that the accused may not be available in the other cases if he is released on bail,” the judge pointed out and said that his previous application for the suspension of jail term was already dismissed.
The Court dismissed his second application for the suspension of sentence, citing the serious nature of allegations against him, his antecedents, and his previous conduct of delaying trial in the other cases pending against him.
