The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has delivered a striking judgment in A. Vignesh vs. State, overturning the conviction of a young man accused under the NDPS Act. Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan not only acquitted Vignesh but also directed three police officers to jointly pay ₹10 lakh compensation to him for fabricating evidence and filing a false case.
Background
In June 2021, police from Thideer Nagar Station claimed to have caught seven people near Madurai’s Melavasal area with a sack containing 24 kilograms of ganja. Vignesh, listed as Accused No. 4, was among those arrested.
According to the prosecution, the police received a “secret tip-off” and conducted the raid, seizing the contraband from one accused while others, including Vignesh, were allegedly present. The trial court convicted Vignesh under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act and sentenced him to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of ₹1 lakh.
However, his defence counsel, Mr. G. Karupasamy Pandian, argued that no recovery was made from Vignesh and that the conviction rested solely on a co-accused’s confession, which the Supreme Court had already held insufficient for conviction.
Court’s Observations
Justice Ramakrishnan was sharply critical of the police investigation. He noted glaring inconsistencies in the officers’ testimonies and the absence of basic legal procedures under the NDPS Act.
“The confession of a co-accused alone cannot be the basis for conviction,” the judge reminded, citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu.
He further pointed out that no signatures of the accused were obtained in the recovery documents - a serious lapse. Even the location of the alleged seizure was described as a “crowded main road,” raising doubts about how such an operation could happen unnoticed.
The court observed, “The absence of signature in the recovery mahazar creates doubt about the presence of the appellant at the scene of occurrence.”
The judgment went further, accusing police officers of conspiring to “secure conviction by hook or crook.” It found that P.W.2 (the Sub-Inspector), P.W.3 (the Investigating Officer), and P.W.4 (the Inspector) had presented false evidence and manipulated case records to frame the accused.
“Fair investigation and fair trial is a fundamental right of the accused,” Justice Ramakrishnan emphasized, adding that the officers’ conduct “undermined public faith in the criminal justice system.”
Decision
The High Court quashed the 2023 trial court order, acquitted Vignesh of all charges, and directed the refund of his fine amount. It further ordered that P.W.2, P.W.3, and P.W.4 must jointly pay ₹10 lakh compensation to Vignesh within one month.
Additionally, the Director General of Police, Chennai, has been directed to conduct an independent inquiry into the conduct of the three officers within a month and take necessary disciplinary action if warranted.
The court concluded with a firm remark: “When officers fabricate cases and give false evidence, they do greater harm to justice than any criminal ever could.”
Case Title: Vignesh v. State of Tamil Nadu (Madras High Court, NDPS Appeal)
Court: Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Judge: Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan
Case Type: Criminal Appeal under NDPS Act
Lower Court Conviction: 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment + ₹1,00,000 fine for alleged possession of 24 kg ganja.
Accused/Appellant: A. Vignesh (Accused No. 4)
Incident Date: 26 June 2021