Justice KK Ramakrishnan also ordered the police department to book Vijayakumar (now ACP-Sellur in Madurai city) under relevant sections, including those in SC/ST Act, for his intentional neglect of duties during the murder case investigation. The court also directed the home secretary to initiate departmental proceedings against him for intentional omissions and lapses committed during the course of the investigation. The fresh investigation into the case must be completed in two months, the court said.

‘Reprobe double murder, book ACP under SC/ST Act’: Madras HC
The court also directed the home secretary to initiate departmental proceedings against him for intentional omissions and lapses committed during the course of the investigation.

MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court scrapped the final report filed by former Karuppayurani sub-division DSP Vijayakumar in a double-murder case that occurred in 2020 and directed the IGP (South Zone) to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to conduct a ‘denovo investigation’.
Justice KK Ramakrishnan also ordered the police department to book Vijayakumar (now ACP-Sellur in Madurai city) under relevant sections, including those in SC/ST Act, for his intentional neglect of duties during the murder case investigation.

The court also directed the home secretary to initiate departmental proceedings against him for intentional omissions and lapses committed during the course of the investigation. The fresh investigation into the case must be completed in two months, the court said.

The court passed the order in a petition filed by Baskaran seeking to transfer the case pertaining to the murder of his brother Krishnarajan (then panchayat president of Kunnathur panchayat) and friend Munisamy, from the Madurai rural police to the CB-CID.

The petitioner said the investigation was conducted in a biased and unfair manner, and the names of a few suspects were deleted from the final report. The court in April ordered IGP South Zone Asra Garg to file a report. Pursuant to the report, the court found that the investigating officer (IO) did not conduct the investigation in a fair manner.

ADVERTISEMENT

The IO fabricated evidence, did not collect electronic records with regard to the case, and did not file the final report within the specified time, the court said.