Bail Cancelled in Murder Conspiracy: Supreme Court Orders Reinvestigation in Vinutha M’s Case
The Supreme Court of India has ruled on the case of Vinutha M, a woman who was allegedly murdered by hired killers at the behest of her husband, Narendra Babu. The case sheds light on a troubling pattern of domestic abuse, legal battles, and judicial intervention to ensure justice. The court not only cancelled the bail of the accused but also ordered a reinvestigation into witness tampering.
Background of the Case
Vinutha M was married to Narendra Babu in 2006, and they had a son in 2009. However, their marriage was marred by allegations of domestic violence and extramarital affairs by Narendra Babu. Vinutha was subjected to continuous harassment, which escalated to physical assaults and threats. As a result, she started living separately in the first floor of their matrimonial home.
Previous Complaints Against Narendra Babu
Vinutha had filed multiple complaints against her husband and his family members, citing threats and physical violence. The key FIRs included:
- FIR No. 231/2015 under Section 498A IPC, where she alleged that her husband and his mother attempted to force her to sign divorce papers and even tried to kill her by pouring kerosene.
- FIR No. 238/2015, where she accused her husband’s family of trying to instigate a sexual assault against her.
- FIR No. 97/2016, alleging an attempt to kill her with an axe.
- FIR No. 205/2017, where goons hired by her husband were caught with weapons.
- FIR No. 50/2019, where she was allegedly physically and sexually assaulted.
Despite numerous complaints and seeking police protection, no concrete action was taken by the authorities.
The Murder of Vinutha M
On December 21, 2019, Vinutha was found dead in her apartment, lying in a pool of blood. Initially, an FIR was filed under Sections 306 (abetment of suicide) and 498A (cruelty) IPC, but later, her mother, Munilakshmi, pressed for the inclusion of murder charges.
Subsequent investigations revealed that Narendra Babu had allegedly paid Rs. 15 lakhs to contract killers to murder Vinutha. He, along with co-accused Prashanth and Jaganatha, was charged under Sections 109, 120B, 201, 302, 450, 454 read with Section 34 of IPC.
Bail Granted by Karnataka High Court
Despite the serious nature of the crime, the Karnataka High Court granted bail to Narendra Babu on August 12, 2020, reasoning that the prosecution had not yet provided sufficient direct evidence linking him to the conspiracy.
Supreme Court’s Intervention
The Supreme Court reviewed the bail order following an appeal by Munilakshmi. During the hearings, it was revealed that key witnesses, including Vinutha’s family, had turned hostile after initially naming Narendra Babu as the conspirator.
Key Observations by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court took a firm stance against witness tampering and held:
“The sudden change of stance by the key witnesses cannot be a mere coincidence. The serious allegations against Narendra Babu, including his past conduct, suggest that he has the potential to influence the investigation.”
It emphasized the importance of witness protection and noted:
“The Courts are under an onerous duty to ensure that the criminal justice system is vibrant and effective. Perpetrators of crime should not go unpunished, and witnesses must be free from threats or undue influence.”
Supreme Court’s Orders
Considering the gravity of the case, the Supreme Court:
- Cancelled Narendra Babu’s bail and ordered him to surrender within a week.
- Directed the Bengaluru Police Commissioner to provide round-the-clock security to Vinutha’s family.
- Ordered a reinvestigation to determine if the witnesses were coerced into changing their statements.
- Allowed the recall of witnesses for fresh cross-examinations.
Impact of the Judgment
This case underscores the importance of protecting victims of domestic violence and ensuring that perpetrators do not misuse legal loopholes to escape justice. The Supreme Court’s firm approach sends a strong message that witness intimidation will not be tolerated, and justice will be upheld.
Petitioner Name: Munilakshmi.Respondent Name: Narendra Babu & Anr..Judgment By: Justice Surya Kant, Justice Dipankar Datta.Place Of Incident: Bengaluru, Karnataka.Judgment Date: 20-10-2023.
Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!
Download Judgment: munilakshmi-vs-narendra-babu-&-anr.-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-20-10-2023.pdf
Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment
See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Domestic Violence
See all petitions in Dowry Cases
See all petitions in Legal Malpractice
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Judgment by Surya Kant
See all petitions in Judgment by Dipankar Datta
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Remanded
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments October 2023
See all petitions in 2023 judgments
See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
