Madurai: Software engineer Kavin Selvakganesh was from the Arumugamangalam area in Thoothukudi district.
He belonged to the Scheduled Caste community. He was murdered in a love affair-related incident on July 27 last year in KTC Nagar, Tirunelveli.
In connection with this incident, Surjith, the brother of the woman said to have been loved by Kavin, was arrested. Later, Surjith’s parents, Tamil Nadu Special Police Force sub-inspectors Saravanan and Krishnakumari, and relative Jayapal were also arrested.
This case was investigated by the CBCID, and a charge sheet was filed in the 2nd Additional District Court in Nellai. Seeking to quash the case, Saravanan, Krishnakumari, and Jayapal filed petitions in the Madurai Bench of the High Court.
After hearing the petitions and reserving judgment, Justice R. Vijayakumar issued the following order yesterday:
No evidence, no witness
There is no evidence that Saravanan and his wife Krishnakumari met his son after the murder and told him to destroy the evidence. There are also no eyewitnesses.
It has been alleged that the first accused, the petitioner, and the third accused met on the basis that the mobile phones belonging to them were connected to the same cell tower at the time of the incident.
Cell tower information indicates only the operational range of that tower. It does not indicate the location of the mobile phone. Cell tower location data cannot conclusively establish that two persons were together.
At most, it can serve only as supplementary evidence. The petitioners had only warned their daughter. It is natural for parents to reprimand a son or daughter who is involved in a romantic relationship during school years.
The phone conversation that the police point to as Saravanan having spoken with the deceased took place 7 years before the incident date. The claim that these two are connected is merely the investigating agency’s assumption.
There must be sufficient evidence to register a case under the Prevention of Atrocities Act. A case of atrocity cannot be filed against him solely because he belongs to a particular community.
There is no allegation that the petitioners were involved in the act of murder. They have not been accused of being present at the scene or of having prior knowledge of the conspiracy. The documents submitted by the prosecution are contrary to the allegations against the petitioners.
Therefore, since there is no caste-based reference, no offense committed in public, and no participation in the underlying criminal act, the case against the petitioners Saravanan and Krishnakumari is quashed.
As for the case against Jayapal, it is alleged that he had already met the deceased Kavin and warned him that if he did not give up the relationship, he would face serious consequences, and that he spoke with him on a mobile phone for more than 24 minutes. Other witnesses have also stated this.
The acts of destroying Surjith’s clothes after the murder, removing the vehicle number plate, and damaging the cellphone took place in the quarry owned by the petitioner. Those items were seized from the quarry itself.
From this, it is clear that there is a basis for the allegations against the petitioner. Therefore, the case against the petitioner cannot be quashed. The petition is dismissed, the judge ordered.
Thirumavalavan’s demand
Meanwhile, in an X post released by VCK leader Thirumavalavan, he said that “the Tamil Nadu government should file an appeal against the release of Saravanan and Krishnakumari.”