Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: L.K..ADVANI in The State Represented By vs Mohammed Hanifa @ Tenkasi Hanifa on 23 October, 2025Matching Fragments
(Judgment of the Court was made by P.VELMURUAN, J.) This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the judgment passed by the Principal Sessions Court, Dindigul, in Session Case No.131 of 2014 dated 20.12.2018 acquitting the respondent/accused namely, Mohammed Hanifa @ Tenkasi Hanifa.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the then Deputy Superintendent of Police of the Special Investigation Team, Madurai, who is also the investigating officer in Crime No.237/2011 on the file of Tirumangalam Taluk, registered a case concerning an attempt on the life of the then Home Minister, Mr.L.K.Advani, through a planted bomb. Non-bailable warrant issued by the competent court against the respondent/M.Mohammed Hanifa Tenkasi Hanifa was pending. Based on the intelligence sources, it was discovered that M.Mohammed Hanifa was hiding at Batlagundu, Dindigul District. On 08.07.2013, at about 10.00 a.m., while executing the warrant, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, along with the police personnel and the revenue personnel (VAO and Village Assistant), attempted to apprehend the said Mohammed https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2025 01:27:49 pm ) Hanifa. Sensing that he was about to be apprehended, the respondent/accused, attempted to murder the Deputy Superintendent of Police Mr.Karthikeyan by attacking him with a long knife. The DSP escaped from the said attack without sustaining injuries. The police personnel accompanying the DSP witnessed the attack and overpowered the accused, seizing the deadly weapon (long knife) to thwart the attempt on the DSP's life. Thereafter, the accused voluntarily confessed in the presence of the VAO and Village Assistant which led to discovery of two knives, two gel bags, two detonators, a copy of Daily Thanthi dated 05.07.2013 carrying an article by Mr.Baskaran of Dindigul, a piece of white paper with a hit list of prominent Hindu leaders and a small bag. All those material objects were seized under Mahazars. Furthermore, the accused identified a location where he had hidden explosive materials in a closed pit, from which 18 electronic detonators and 18 gel bags were seized under the cover of a Mahazar before the witnesses.
18. It is not in dispute that the case was registered against the appellant in Crime No.237/2011 on the file of Tirumangalam Taluk Police Station and also not in dispute that during the PRC stage, NBW was issued against the respondent and the same was pending. The offence is also a heinous crime i.e., to take away the life of the former Home Minister, Mr.L.K.Advani, through a planted bomb. Since the respondent was absconding in that case, NBW was issued and then team of officers was formed to execute NBW. Once the Court issued NBW, it is the duty of the police to execute NBW. Since PW1 was the investigating officer in that case and he received a secret information from the reliable sources regarding the place of hiding of the respondent, he formed a team of officers including PW5-VAO, independent witness and secured the accused. Since the team of officers are only officials went on official duty to execute NBW and arrested the respondent who absconded in order to escape from the clutches of law in a pending https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2025 01:27:49 pm ) criminal case, it cannot be expected that prior intimation should be given to the local police. If the respondent knows about the movement of the police, he will escape and therefore, naturally the police will maintain secrecy in such cases.