HC upholds conviction of over 200 persons in Vachathi atrocity case

The Madras high court on Friday upheld a trial court order convicting over 200 men, including Forest and Police Officials and sentencing them to various prison terms for atrocities committed against tribals including rape, where the victims included a minor girl and a pregnant woman.
The atrocities, that sent shockwaves across Tamil Nadu, happened during a raid for smuggled sandalwood at Vachathi village in Dharmapuri district in 1992. The CBI probed the case.
A lower court in Dharmapuri had in 2011 convicted and sentenced 215 men to prison terms ranging from 1 to 10 years. Incidentally, the HC order came exactly 12 years after the ruling of the trial court, which delivered it on September 29, 2011.
On Friday, Justice P Velmurugan also directed providing an immediate compensation of Rs 10 lakh to 18 women, who were victims of sexual assault during the infamous incident in Dharmapuri, about 300 km from here. Dismissing a batch of appeals from the accused, Justice Velmurugan said, “in view of the above discussion and for the foregoing reasons, this court finds all the accused have committed the charged offences. There are no merits in these appeals. All the criminal appeals stand dismissed as devoid of merits. The trial court is directed to secure the custody of the accused to serve remaining period of sentence, if any”.
The judge directed the state government to pay Rs 10 lakh to the rape victims and recover 50 per cent of the amount from the accused who committed the offence.
The court also directed the state government to provide suitable employment either by self-employment or permanent jobs to the 18 victims or their family members for their livelihood, which were destroyed by the then government officials. The state government shall report to this court regarding the welfare measures taken to improve the livelihood and standard of living of the Vachathi villagers, after this incident, the judge added.
The judge directed the state government to take stringent action against the then District Collector, the then Superintendent of Police and then the District Forest Officer during the relevant period.
He said the then Collector and the Revenue officials had not shown any interest in the matter and did not care about the seriousness of the issue. Even a prosecution witness had given a complaint to them prior to the raid regarding the smuggling of sandalwood by identifying persons.