Dharmapuri bus burning: HC upholds death sentence

Describing the killing of the three girls as “extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical and revolting,” a Division Bench comprising Justices D Murugesan and V Periyakaruppaiah, rejected the appeals of the three, saying: “imposition of lesser punishment in order to reform the accused is of no purpose and will not meet the ends of justice.” The Court further ruled that there were no mitigating circumstances and no purpose would be served by awarding any punishment that would be reformative rather than deterrent.

Soon after a special court in Chennai delivered its verdict against Jayalalithaa in a case relating to building violations by the Pleasant Stay Hotel in Kodaikanal, sentencing her to a one-year prison term, AIADMK men went berserk across Tamil Nadu.

In Dharmapuri town, a bus belonging to the Coimbatore-based Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, carrying 44 girls fell victim to the mob fury. While most of the students and teachers managed to jump out of the burning bus, three girls were trapped inside and burnt to death.

With accusations leveled against the erstwhile AIADMK regime of attempting “to derail justice”, the trial was transferred to Salem Sessions Court. The Sessions Court finally delivered its verdict on February 15, 2007, awarding death penalty to Nedunchezhiyan, then secretary of the AIADMK’s Dharmapuri town unit, Ravindran, then MGR Forum functionary, and C Muniappan , a former panchayat president.

The court sentenced 25 other accused to varying terms extending to a maximum of seven years in jail for them. Dismissing their appeals, the Madras High Court ruled that the lower court order that the sentences run consecutively would be modified to the effect that they run concurrently. So the 25 would undergo a maximum of two years in prison.

The High Court Bench dismissed their appeals saying the key eye-witnesses, particularly the driver and cleaner of the bus and students, were all independent. “There is no reason for them to falsely depose before the court about the agitated mood of the group. The prosecution has amply proved through unassailable evidence of witnesses that the demonstration was not peaceful and that the demonstrators were aggressive,” the Bench said.

Observing that the prosecution had “established beyond reasonable doubt” regarding the involvement of the three accused in the “occurrence at Bharathipuram (in Dharmapuri town),” the Bench said “while A2 (one of the accused) poured petrol inside the bus, A3 had set fire and A4 had instigated the act.

“The accused knew that the rear door of the bus was locked and that it cannot be opened as suitcases of the students were dumped there. They were also aware that a number of girl students were inside the bus and fearing untoward incidents, the shutters of the bus were also closed. Knowing this well, the accused had poured petrol through the front entrance and set fire despite repeated requests of the students to allow them to get down from the bus,” the Court said.

“Keeping in mind the law laid down by the Supreme Court, we have every reason to hold that the offence was diabolical, ghastly, brutal and gruesome,” the Bench said