The Madras High Court recently upheld the conviction and life sentence imposed on a man for killing a woman engineering student inside her classroom after she refused to continue her relationship with him. (Udaykumar v. State).A Bench of Justices N Anand Venkatesh and K K Ramakrishnan dismissed the appeal filed by Udayakumar, who had been convicted by a Karur court for murdering Sonali, a third-year civil engineering student at Karur College of Engineering.“This is an unfortunate case where a girl student who used to have some proximity with the accused person chose to abstain herself for some reasons. The accused person was not able to digest this attitude of the deceased girl,” the Court said.The Court added that such incidents reflected a disturbing trend.“It has become a trend in the recent times where a boy, who gets rejected in a relationship, thinks that a girl is bound to continue with the relationship failing which he will be justified in even killing the girl,” the Bench observed..According to the prosecution, Sonali and the accused had been close for some time. After she distanced herself from him, he allegedly became agitated. On August 30, 2016, the accused entered her classroom at around 10:30 AM and attacked her indiscriminately on the head with a wooden log. When an assistant professor tried to intervene, he was also attacked.Sonali later died at Apollo Hospital, Madurai. The trial court convicted the accused under Sections 449, 294(b), 324, 302 and 506(II) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to life imprisonment for murder..The Court criticised the investigation, particularly the prosecution’s claim that the wooden log was recovered from a bush after the accused was arrested, when witnesses had stated that the weapon was dropped in the classroom.“As usual, the investigating officer, who probably does not even have the fundamental knowledge in conducting of investigation, mechanically comes up with the theory of recovery,” the Bench said.It held that this lapse would not demolish the prosecution case, since the evidence of the injured witness was credible and corroborated by medical evidence..The Bench also expressed disappointment at students who turned hostile despite allegedly witnessing the incident.“There is no use in merely expressing dissent and expressing views in social media and it has to translate itself into action or else the students will only become paper tigers in real life."With a “heavy heart,” the Court said that the students had let down the deceased by not supporting the prosecution and had failed in their duty to uphold the truth..The appellant was represented by Senior Advocate Abudu Kumar Rajarathinam with Advocate KM Karunakaran. .State counsel D Venkatesh appeared for the prosecution..[Read Judgment]
