Madras High Court Overturns Acquittal in High-Profile Attempted Murder and Explosives Case

Conviction of Mohammed Hanifa for Attempting to Murder Deputy Superintendent of Police and Possessing Explosives Upheld by Madras High Court

In a significant judgment, the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) has overturned the acquittal of Mohammed Hanifa, also known as Tenkasi Hanifa, who was previously absolved of charges related to attempted murder of a Deputy Superintendent of Police and possession of explosives. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Mr. P. Velmurugan and L. Victoria Gowri, ruled on October 23, 2025, that the trial court had erred in its judgment by dismissing substantive evidence presented by the prosecution. 

The case stemmed from an incident on July 8, 2013, when the accused allegedly attacked DSP Karthikeyan with a knife while evading a non-bailable warrant. Following the attack, Hanifa's confession led to the discovery of explosives and incriminating materials. Initially acquitted by the Principal Sessions Court in Dindigul in December 2018, the State appealed the verdict, arguing procedural errors should not overshadow the substantive evidence of Hanifa's guilt.

The High Court, after a thorough review, emphasized the reliability of police and independent witness testimonies, rejecting the trial court’s focus on procedural discrepancies. The court noted that the evidence of the police officials, corroborated by expert testimony and independent witnesses, sufficiently proved the charges against Hanifa beyond a reasonable doubt. 

The Bench highlighted that minor procedural irregularities and contradictions do not vitiate the core evidence if it is cogent and credible. The court asserted that the absence of independent witnesses and minor discrepancies in the testimonies were immaterial to the case's substantive merits.

The judgment reinstates charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and the Explosive Substances Act against Hanifa. The court also directed Hanifa to appear for sentencing, scheduled for October 28, 2025.

Bottom Line:

Conviction of respondent/accused for attempting to murder a Deputy Superintendent of Police and possession of explosives under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Explosive Substances Act, 1908 upheld. Minor procedural irregularities and discrepancies do not vitiate substantive evidence establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 353, 307, 153(A); Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 Section 16(1)(b); Explosive Substances Act, 1908 Sections 4(a)(i), 4(b)(ii); Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Section 27; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 162.

State v. Mohammed Hanifa @ Tenkasi Hanifa, (Madras)(Madurai Bench)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2797339