Murder attempt case: HC awards 5-year jail to ‘Tenkasi’ Hanifa

MADURAI: The Madurai bench of Madras High Court on Tuesday sentenced M Mohammed Hanifa alias ‘Tenkasi’ Hanifa to undergo five years of rigorous imprisonment, overturning the trial court’s ruling that acquitted him in an attempt to murder case.

The state government, through the Special Investigation Division, Crime Branch CID, filed a plea to set aside the judgment passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul, dated December 20, 2018, acquitting Hanifa.

The case of the prosecution is that of the then DSP of the Special Investigation Team, Madurai, who is the investigating officer in a case concerning an attempt on the life of the then Home Minister LK Advani, by planting a bomb.

Based on the intelligence sources, it was discovered that Hanifa hid at Batlagundu, Dindigul district and on July 8, 2013, at about 10 am, while executing the warrant, the DSP, along with the police personnel, VAO and Village Assistant, attempted to apprehend Hanifa.

Sensing that he was about to be apprehended, Hanifa attempted to murder DSP Karthikeyan by attacking him with a knife. The DSP escaped from the attack without sustaining injuries.

The police personnel accompanying the DSP witnessed the attack and overpowered the accused, seizing the weapon to thwart the attempt on the DSP's life.

Thereafter, the accused voluntarily confessed in the presence of the VAO and Village Assistant which led to discovery of two knives, two gel bags, two detonators, a piece of white paper with a hit list of prominent Hindu leaders and a small bag. All those material objects were seized under Mahazars.

Furthermore, the accused identified a location where he hid explosive materials in a closed pit, from which 18 electronic detonators and 18 gel bags were seized under the cover of a Mahazar before the witnesses.

The DSP subsequently complained to Batlagundu station, where a case was registered against Hanifa along with two accomplices. After completing the investigation, a final report was filed against the accused for the offences under Sections 353, 307, and 153(A) of the IPC, Section 16(1)(b) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and Sections 4(a)(i) and 4(b)(ii) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908.

A division bench comprising Justice P. Velmurugan and Justice L. Victoria Gowri in an order said totally 21 witnesses were examined and 31 documents were marked to substantiate the case on the side of the prosecution.

Once the court finds that the evidence of the witnesses is reliable, cogent and consistent and inspiring confidence of the court, the court could record the conviction and further it is a settled proposition of law that the case could be proved through competent witnesses.

Therefore, this court is of the view that the prosecution has established the case beyond a reasonable doubt. For all the foregoing reasons, the trial court judgment has been set aside, and the criminal appeal is allowed.