The Supreme Court has allowed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to continue its probe into the murder of Tamil Nadu Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) leader K Armstrong but stayed the direction of the Madras high court last month which quashed the charge sheet prepared by the Tamil Nadu police in this regard.
A bench of justices JK Maheshwari and NV Anjaria passed the order on Friday in an appeal filed by the Tamil Nadu police against the September 24 order of the Madras HC which allowed the petition filed by Armstrong’s brother Keynos who cited several gaps in the investigation by the state police.
The court issued notice on the state’s appeal and said, “In the meantime, order of quashing the charge sheet shall remain stayed. However, the direction for transferring the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation shall remain in operation.”
The court posted the matter on November 14 granting time to Keynos to file his response.
The state was represented by senior advocate Sidharth Luthra who pointed out that the HC has set aside the investigation report prepared by the police after carrying out an extensive probe. He said that the charge sheet which runs into 7,411 pages records detailed discussion on the evidence gathered, the motive of the crime and the role of the 30 accused persons.
The state appeal filed through advocate Sabarish Subramanian had pressed for an urgent stay of the HC order pointing out a serious law and order situation that may arise if the accused are released. The trial court had extended their custodial remand on September 26 that was expiring on October 10.
Luthra pointed out that the CBI probe is ordered by the court only in exceptional circumstances. However, this was a case where the investigation was timely and complete. The HC, he said, acted in a casual manner to set the entire investigation at naught and directing de novo probe by the CBI.
Armstrong’s brother was represented in court by advocate Rishabh Sancheti who pointed out that the HC direction flags material contradictions in the charge sheet besides procedural shortcomings in the probe.
Armstrong was hacked to death on July 5, 2024 outside his residence in Perambur, Chennai by a group of armed persons who approached him in disguise as food delivery personnel. A special investigation team (SIT) was constituted comprising of senior police officials who found that various offences under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, Explosives Substances Act and Arms Act stood proved.
However, the deceased’s brother filed a petition in the high court pointing to gaps in the final report. The absence of CCTV or forensic evidence made the case weak as the prosecution story hinged upon uncorroborated confessions. Even two of the key conspirators were not apprehended. HIs brother further cited material contradictions in the statement of the deceased’s wife and the version presented in the charge sheet on the role of the accused.
Taking note of these submissions, the HC concluded, “The FIR stated the attackers were disguised as food delivery personnel and suggested that the motive might be revenge linked to one Arcot Suresh. The charge sheet, on the other hand, attributes the motive to gang rivalry and primarily relies on the confessional statements of the accused, allegedly without strong corroboration from independent sources such as CCTV footage, call records, or forensic reports.”
The state pointed out that its charge sheet was based on confessional statements and call records. Even on the non-arrest of two accused, the state said that the same does not vitiate the probe. Further, the state said that the two are believed to be outside the country and steps have been taken to issue Red Corner Notice against them through Interpol.
About the Author
