New Delhi- The Supreme Court, while upholding the convictions of 11 accused in Tamil Nadu’s high-profile 2003 honour-killing case, identified deep-rooted casteism as the driving force behind this heinous crime. The case, involving the murder of a Vanniyar woman, Kannagi, and her Dalit husband, Murugesan, for their inter-caste marriage, is considered Tamil Nadu’s first recorded honour-killing case.
The bench, comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prashant Kumar Mishra, described it as “the cruel reality of the caste hierarchy” and stated, “Such crimes, ironically termed honour killings, require severe punishment.”
This horrific crime took place on July 7-8, 2003, in Pudukoorapettai village, Cuddalore district, Tamil Nadu. Kannagi (from the Vanniyar community) and Murugesan (from the Dalit community), both in their early twenties, were in love. Murugesan had completed a B.E. in Chemical Engineering from Chidambaram and was employed in Bengaluru, while Kannagi was pursuing a B.Com degree. Aware of opposition from Kannagi’s family, the couple secretly married on May 5, 2003, before the Registrar of Marriage in Cuddalore.
In early July 2003, when the couple quietly left the village, Kannagi’s brother, Maruthupandiyan, threatened Murugesan’s father, Samikannu , to bring Murugesan back. Maruthupandiyan falsely claimed that Murugesan had not repaid borrowed money. On July 7, Murugesan was brought to the village, where he was stripped, tied to a post, and brutally beaten to reveal Kannagi’s whereabouts. This savagery occurred in the presence of numerous villagers, none of whom intervened.
Murugesan eventually disclosed that Kannagi was in Moongilthuraipattu village. Kannagi was brought back, and on the morning of July 8, both were taken to a cashew grove and forced to drink the insecticide Nuvacron (Monocrotophos). Kannagi’s father, Duraisamy, provided the poison to Maruthupandiyan, who administered it first to his sister and then to Murugesan. Murugesan’s stepmother, Chinnapillai, an eyewitness to this gruesome act, confirmed these details in court. Both victims died within minutes, and their bodies were burned at separate locations.
Two police officers from Virudhachalam police station, Sub-Inspector K.P. Tamilmaran and Inspector M. Sellamuthu , were accused of failing to register an FIR despite knowing about the crime. When Chinnapillai attempted to lodge a complaint on July 8, she was rebuffed with casteist slurs and driven away. The court remarked, “It is difficult to believe that such a dastardly double murder takes place in the village, and those in charge of the police station remain unaware of the crime.”
The FIR was filed nine days later, on July 17, 2003, only after media and political pressure mounted. The initial investigation, led by Sellamuthu, falsely implicated four Dalit members of Murugesan’s family, including his father, Samikannu. The Supreme Court termed this investigation “motivated and downright dishonest,” aimed at “shielding the perpetrators and framing the innocent.”
In 2004, the Madras High Court transferred the case to the CBI following a petition by Murugesan’s family. The CBI filed a charge-sheet against 15 accused in 2005. The trial court convicted 13 accused in 2021, sentencing 10 to life imprisonment for murder, and 2 for violations under the SC/ST Act. Maruthupandiyan’s death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by the High Court in 2022.
The Supreme Court upheld the Madras High Court’s ruling, affirming the convictions of 11 accused. Sub-Inspector K.P. Tamilmaran's sentence was reduced to two years of rigorous imprisonment, while Inspector M. Sellamuthu’s life sentence was maintained, as he was “the main architect behind fabricating false evidence and implicating Dalits.” The court stated, “At the root of this crime is India’s deeply entrenched hierarchical caste system, and this most dishonorable act goes by the name of honour-killing!”
The court also addressed issues of hostile witnesses and dilatory tactics, noting, “The long and inordinate delay… speaks volumes about the gross inefficiency at the hands of the prosecution and dilatory tactics employed by the defense.” Upholding Chinnapillai’s testimony as credible, the court clarified, “A close relative who is a very natural witness cannot be termed as an interested witness.”
The Supreme Court awarded Rs. 5 lakh in compensation to Samikannu and Chinnapillai, to be paid by the Tamil Nadu government, in addition to amounts ordered by lower courts. The court emphasized, “Such a wicked and odious crime requires strong punishment and victim compensation.” All accused on bail were directed to surrender within two weeks.
You can also join our WhatsApp group to get premium and selected news of The Mooknayak on WhatsApp. Click here to join the WhatsApp group.