Court Confirms Life Imprisonment Sentences for 12 Accused, Acquits Two, Rejects Custodial Torture Claim, and Emphasizes Importance of Electronic Evidence in Ensuring Justice
In a landmark judgment delivered on May 25, 2026, the Kerala High Court (Division Bench) upheld the convictions of 12 accused in the horrific mob lynching and death of Madhu, a 27-year-old tribal man belonging to the Mudugar Scheduled Tribe. The accused, residents of Mukkali and surrounding areas, were found guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with multiple other offences including grievous hurt and wrongful confinement. Significantly, the Court reversed the trial court’s acquittal on enhanced charges under Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST (PoA) Act), holding that the accused knew Madhu’s tribal identity and mandating life imprisonment.
The case arose from a brutal incident on February 22, 2018, when Madhu was forcibly apprehended from the Aandiyallachaal reserved forest by a group of 16 individuals who accused him of repeated thefts from local shops. The accused tied Madhu’s hands, paraded him semi-naked through public roads carrying stolen goods, beat him with sticks and fists, and publicly humiliated him by recording and circulating videos on social media. Madhu died hours later from the cumulative effect of multiple injuries inflicted during this ordeal.
The High Court conducted a comprehensive re-appreciation of the entire evidence, including extensive electronic evidence comprising CCTV footage from three independent sources, mobile phone videos and photographs seized from the accused, call data records (CDRs), and GPS metadata. The Court found the electronic evidence admissible and reliable, rejecting the defense’s challenge that the forensic examination was conducted by non-notified experts under Section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The Court reaffirmed Supreme Court precedents that electronic evidence accompanied by proper Section 65B certificates and expert testimony under Section 293 of the Cr.P.C. is admissible even without formal notification.
On the crucial issue of custodial torture, the Court rejected the defense claim that Madhu’s injuries were inflicted while in police custody during transport to the hospital. Medical evidence established that brain edema leading to death develops over 2-3 hours, and Madhu was taken into police custody only about 45 minutes before death was pronounced. The medical officer who conducted the autopsy confirmed that the injuries originated during the forest stage, not in custody. Independent inquiries by the Sub-Collector and Judicial Magistrate, as well as the National Human Rights Commission, found no evidence of police torture.
The Court extensively analyzed the statutory presumption under Section 8 of the SC/ST (PoA) Act, which presumes that an accused who has personal knowledge of a Scheduled Tribe victim’s identity is deemed to have knowledge of that identity unless disproved. Given that the accused were long-term residents and traders in a tribal-dominant area, had prior complaints and cases against Madhu, and had communicated with the police about him, the Court held that the presumption stood unrebutted. Consequently, the enhanced punishment provisions mandating life imprisonment under Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) applied.
Regarding individual accused, the Court confirmed convictions against Accused Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, and 15 for offences including culpable homicide not amounting to murder, grievous hurt, wrongful confinement, and offences under the SC/ST (PoA) Act with life imprisonment and hefty fines. Accused No. 16 was convicted of causing hurt under Section 323 IPC with modified sentence. However, the Court acquitted Accused Nos. 4 and 11 due to lack of evidence showing overt acts or participation beyond mere presence or photography.
The Court also overturned the trial court’s finding of guilt against Accused No. 1 (Hussain) for stamping on Madhu, holding that the eyewitnesses’ evidence was unreliable and the CCTV footage inconclusive at the relevant moment. Hussain was acquitted of all charges and ordered released if not required in other cases.
The judgment underscored the critical role of electronic evidence in modern criminal justice, especially where eyewitnesses turn hostile or refuse to testify. It lamented the social discrimination and vulnerability faced by Scheduled Tribes, calling for effective witness protection and judicial sensitization in SC/ST atrocity cases. The Court emphasized that the constitutional guarantees of dignity and equality must be fully realized for tribal citizens and expressed hope that such heinous acts would never recur.
Sentence hearing under Section 235(2) Cr.P.C. was scheduled for further consideration. The judgment also directed enhanced compensation payments to Madhu’s mother from the fines recovered.
Bottom Line:
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - Conviction of accused for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC read with Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Acquittal of some accused upheld.
Statutory provision(s):
Indian Penal Code Sections 143, 147, 149, 304 Part II, 323, 324, 326, 342, 352, 367; Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Sections 3(1)(d), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 8; Indian Evidence Act Sections 6, 45, 45A, 114, 136; Information Technology Act Section 79A; Code of Criminal Procedure Sections 162, 176, 232, 235, 293, 357, 386, 428
Hussain v. State of Kerala, (Kerala)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2906538
