Kerala High Court’s Decision on 2018 Attappady Lynching Case
The Kerala High Court issued a significant ruling on Monday in the high-profile Attappady lynching case, which involved the tragic death of Madhu, a tribal man, in 2018. The court acquitted Hussain, the first accused, while upholding the convictions of twelve others. This case, formally referred to as Hussain v State of Kerala & Ors., has been closely monitored due to its grave implications.
The Division Bench consisting of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice KV Jayakumar delivered the verdict. They set aside the conviction and sentence previously imposed on Hussain. However, the court confirmed the convictions of twelve others, who have been held accountable for severe offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 304 (causing death by negligence) and 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means). The appeals filed by these convicts were dismissed.
Details of the Case
The case revolves around the lynching of Madhu, a mentally challenged tribal youth from Attappady in Palakkad. In February 2018, Madhu was allegedly accused of theft and brutally beaten by a mob. He was caught from a nearby forest and subjected to a sustained assault, as argued by the prosecution. The incident sparked outrage and highlighted issues related to the treatment of marginalized communities.
In April 2023, a Special Court for SC/ST Act cases convicted fourteen out of sixteen individuals accused in the case. Of these, thirteen were found guilty of serious crimes, while the sixteenth accused, Muneer, was sentenced to three months imprisonment for a lesser offence. Since Muneer had already served this time as an undertrial, he was released following the trial court’s decision.
High Court Verdict and Implications
Following the High Court’s ruling, the convicted individuals include Marakkar (A2), Shamsudheen (A3), Radhakrishnan (A5), Aboobacker (A6), Sidhique (A7), Ubaid (A8), Najeeb (A9), Jaijumon (A10), Sajeev (A12), Satheesh (A13), Hareesh (A14), and Biju (A15). The court upheld the trial court’s findings related to unlawful assembly, rioting, causing hurt, and other related offences under the IPC.
More Read
Additionally, the High Court overturned the trial court’s decision regarding certain provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC/ST Act). The court determined that Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act were applicable to Muneer, enhancing his punishment accordingly. The sentencing orders are anticipated later in the day.
The verdict also saw the High Court dismiss a challenge filed by Muneer, though it modified his conviction to include guilt under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, read with Section 323 IPC (voluntarily causing hurt).
This ruling has significant implications for justice and accountability in cases involving marginalized communities, as it reaffirms the legal framework’s role in addressing such grave offences.
