How ‘chilli powder’ theory collapsed 14-year-old double murder conviction

Justices N Anand Venkatesh and K K Ramakrishnan found that while witnesses repeatedly referred to the chilli powder episode, there was no medical evidence to support it. (Image enhanced using AI)

Chilli powder theory falls apart

• According to the prosecution, chilli powder was thrown into the victims’ eyes to disable them before the attack.
• The high court found that while witnesses repeatedly referred to the chilli powder episode, there was no medical evidence to support it.
• Neither postmortem report recorded any indication of chilli powder exposure, and the substance allegedly recovered from the scene was never sent for forensic examination.
• The court said this omission struck at the root of the prosecution’s case because the alleged chilli powder attack was presented as the trigger that made the murders possible.
• Without proof of that claim, the court held, the entire sequence of events became suspect.
• “In such a scenario, the court must be very careful while acting upon the evidence which is full of contradictions and inherent improbabilities,” the court said.

Family dispute that turned deadly

The prosecution’s case traced the origin of the murders to a bitter family dispute.

According to investigators, Kannan (D1) had been married to one of the accused.

The prosecution alleged that Kannan discovered Selvaraj and the wife of Kannan, both accused in the case, in a compromising position, leading to a confrontation and eventually a customary divorce.

Periyasamy (D2), who allegedly supported Kannan and his family during a village panchayat, became a target of the accused’s hostility.

On May 18, 2012, Kannan travelled to Thadikombu after receiving a phone call from Periyasamy.

The prosecution alleged that while the two men were standing near a Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC) outlet, three accused arrived in a share auto and threw chilli powder into their eyes.

The remaining accused allegedly followed and attacked them with knives and aruvals.

Kannan died shortly after the assault. Periyasamy succumbed to his injuries on May 24, 2012.

Court tears into investigation

The bench noted that several crucial witnesses were never examined, including the victim’s brother, who took him to the hospital, another man who accompanied him during treatment, the ambulance drivers, and the driver of the shared auto allegedly used by the accused.

The court also questioned whether the investigating officer had properly inspected the crime scene.

One victim’s hand had reportedly been severed during the attack, yet there was no indication that investigators recovered or documented the severed limb at the spot.

“This Court expresses its anguish in the manner in which the investigation has been conducted in this case, which involves a double murder. PW16 has conducted one of the most slipshod investigations we have seen in recent times,” the bench observed.

The court added that the prosecution failed not because the crime lacked seriousness, but because the investigation was riddled with omissions and unexplained lapses.

Trial court sentenced four to life

After a prolonged trial, the additional district and sessions court, Dindigul, convicted Selvaraj, Selvapandi, Muthukumar and Thoongan alias Urathevar on October 9, 2023.

The four were sentenced to life imprisonment for murder, while three were acquitted.

The convicted men subsequently challenged the verdict before the high court.

Eyewitness account found unreliable

The high court found serious flaws in the testimony of the prosecution’s key eyewitnesses, the parents of Kannan.

The bench noted that the couple lived around 10 to 15 kilometres away from the scene of the crime and gave contradictory accounts about how they came to witness the attack.

While one claimed to have seen the incident from a distance after receiving information over the phone, the other suggested that they had spoken directly to Kannan moments before the assault.

The court also noted that the prosecution failed to identify or examine the person who allegedly informed the parents that Kannan was being chased.

The judges concluded that the presence of the witnesses at the scene itself was doubtful.

The high court held that the eyewitness account could not be relied upon and that it appeared the witnesses were not actually present when the crime took place.

Mystery over timing of crime

The bench also highlighted discrepancies in hospital records and accident registers that created uncertainty about the timing of the incident.

According to the judgment, alterations in medical records and conflicting entries regarding the time of occurrence raised serious doubts about the prosecution’s narrative.

The court noted that if one version of the timing was accepted, it would be impossible for the eyewitnesses to have been present when the attack occurred.

Adding to the confusion was the absence of evidence showing where Kannan was taken after the assault, which doctor examined him, or whether any accident register had been prepared in his case.

Dying declaration not enough

The prosecution also relied on a dying declaration made by Periyasamy before a judicial magistrate while he was undergoing treatment.

While acknowledging that a reliable dying declaration can form the sole basis for conviction, the high court held that the declaration in this case could not be accepted without corroboration.

The judges pointed out that the dying declaration named all the accused persons, including the three, who had already been acquitted by the trial court.

“The dying declaration has to be acted upon as a whole, or it has to be rejected as a whole. There is no question of dissecting the dying declaration and applying it against some of the accused persons and leaving it for the rest,” the court said.

The bench also found it surprising that although Periyasamy survived for several days after the incident, the investigating officer never formally recorded his statement.

Convictions quashed, officer faces action

Holding that the prosecution had failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the high court set aside the convictions and life sentences imposed on all four appellants.

The court ordered their immediate release unless required in any other case, directed that any fines paid be refunded and terminated their bail bonds.

The bench also ordered departmental proceedings against the investigating officer, observing that the acquittal was the direct consequence of a deeply flawed investigation into a case involving the loss of two lives.