The Third Additional District Court in Gobichettipalayam, Erode district, on Tuesday acquitted all nine accused in the case relating to the sensational abduction of Kannada thespian Rajkumar and three others, by notorious forest brigand Veerappan and his associates in July 2000. Judge K. Mani pointed out that the prosecution had failed to submit key material evidence in the court and the actor’s family members had also not deposed implicating any of the accused in the case.
Rajkumar, who was taken hostage from his ancestral home in Doddagajanur in uphill Talavadi in Erode district, was held captive for 108 days, keeping the governments of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu on tenterhooks. The two governments had engaged multiple emissaries, including Nakkeeran magazine editor R.R. Gopal, and Tamil Nationalist Movement leader Pazha Nedumaran to negotiate his release even as Veerappan, aided by Tamil extremists who had joined him in the forest, played the Tamil card and placed numerous political demands.
In his judgment, Judge Mani said the prosecution failed to produce any evidence that the nine were Veerappan’s accomplices. The judge said that no inquiry was conducted with Rajkumar after his release or his wife Parvathamma, a key witness in the case, to establish that the accused were involved in the crime. Also, the two did not participate in the identification parade to identify the accused. The judge pointed out that neither did Parvathamma lodge a complaint with the Talavadi police nor did the relatives of the three persons who were also abducted file any complaint.
He said no searches were conducted on the houses of the accused to seize weapons or other evidence in the case.
The judge also said that audio cassettes demanding ransom were not produced in the court and other evidences were submitted to the court after 10 months. The Supreme Court has clearly stated that evidence, including weapons, should be sealed on the crime spot and submitted to the court. But in this case, the weapons were not sealed on the spot, the judge observed.
Also, the interlocutors who went to the forest for negotiations were not questioned. The judge said that though the FIR said that Rajkumar was tortured in the forest, the actor himself claimed in a video that he was fine. Giving the benefit of doubt to the accused, all the nine were acquitted.
Rajkumar, his son-in-law S.A. Govindaraju, relative Nagesh and assistant film director Nagappa were abducted on July 30, 2000. While Nagappa escaped on September 28, others were held in captivity in the jungle and were released on November 15, 2000.
Based on a complaint from Village Administrative Officer Gopal, the Talavadi police had on July 31, 2000, registered a case of abduction. Later, the case was transferred to CB-CID, Coimbatore Range, who registered a case under Sections 120-B r/w 364-A, 364 (A), 147, 148, 449, 365 and 109 of IPC and 25 (1-B) (a) and 27 (1) Arms Act, 1959 and 4 (b) of The Explosives Substances Act, 1908.
Of the 14 accused, Veerappan, Sethukuli Govindan, and Chandre Gowda, died in firing during the Special Task Force’s ‘Operation Cocoon’ on October 18, 2004, and the CB-CID filed charge sheet against 11 persons. S. Maran alias Senguttuvan alias Manivannan alias Mullaivalavan alias Kannaiyan of Thanjavur; S. Govindaraj alias Megnathan alias Saba alias Inian alias Pranjothi alias Raju of Cuddalore; D. Andril alias Ezhumalai alias Paranjothi of Villupuram; R. Selvam alias Sathya alias Raju of Trichy; K. Amirthalingam alias Lingam alias Chezhian of Tiruvarur; B. Basuvanna, R. Nagaraj, C. Puttusamy and S. Rama alias Kalmandipuram Rama, all from Talavadi were put to trial.
While another accused C. Mallu of Talavadi died during the trial, G. Ramesh of Cuddalore went absconding. On Tuesday, eight of the accused were present in the court while Puttusamy was not present on health grounds.
B.B. Mohan, lawyer for the accused, said that it is a historical judgment.
Public Prosecutor and Government Pleader T. Dhanakottiram told The Hindu that he has applied for the certified copy of the judgment and after studying the merits of the order, would decide on filing an appeal in the High Court. Since two governments are involved, discussions will be held with senior government and CB-CID officials before taking any decision, he added.