Kodanad Murder & Dacoity Case: Supreme Court Dismisses AIADMK Member's Plea To Stop Further Investigation

Case Before Madras High Court

AIADMK Functionary Anubhav Ravi had approached the High Court averring that due to representation made by the prosecution before the trial Court, the case had gained momentum and had been given wide publicity. Apprehending that the threat and pressure would continue due to protraction of trial proceedings, Ravi had submitted that he was living with fear since he was a witness.

Ravi's counsel had also submitted that there was nothing to indicate whether at all the prosecution had sought for permission and the trial Court had given any permission for conducting further investigation.

Submitting that on the guise of further investigation, opening the pandora box would only cause further delay in proceeding with the trial, Ravi had sought for directions for completion of trial.

Appearing for the State, the Public Prosecutor while producing the memo filed by prosecution before the trial Court had submitted that mere apprehension of delay in progress of the trial could not be a reason to delay further investigation.

Dismissing Ravi's petition, the Madras High Court bench of Justice M Nirmal Kumar on August 27, 2021 had observed that the investigating agency/Police invoking Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. and conducting further investigation needed no interference.

Remarking that the object of criminal trial was to discover the truth and plausible evidence had to be brought on record, whatever stage it might be, the bench remarked that,

"In this case, not only the murder and dacoity had taken place at Kodanadu Tea Estate, it had been followed by serious suspicious deaths. Whatever materials are collected, it is ultimately the concerned Court to decide the acceptance and otherwise of the same. It is always better to have fair and impartial trial to arrive at a just decision. Further, in this case, the petitioner is neither a defacto complainant, nor a victim or accused. He is only a witness in this case. The petitioner has no say in the manner of investigation and trial of the above case. Further, no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner if further investigation is conducted. It is seen that in view of no relief has been sought against the petitioner and nothing to show that the petitioner has locus or say in the application for further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C."

Kodanadu Murder and Dacoity Case

The case dates back to 2017 in which the accused after hatching a conspiracy with others trespassed into the Kodanadu Tea Estate Bungalow of the former Chief Minister with deadly weapons and committed dacoity and murdered one Om Bahadur Watchman and caused multiple injuries to another Watchman Krishnan Dhaba.

On completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed by the Police before District Judge-Chief Judicial Magistrate, The Nilgiris and the 10 accused(s) were charged for offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 342, 447, 449, 458, 395 r/w 397, 396 and 302 r/w 120(B) IPC.

Case Title: Ravi @ Anubav Ravi Versus The Inspector Of Police| SLP(Crl) No. 6545-6546/2021

Click Here To Read/ Download Order