Saumya killer, Govindachamy, to be hanged till death

[1]

Perhaps Soumya would have met the man in her life had she not boarded the fateful train from Ernakulam town railway station on the night of February 1.

The killer was on the same train and he pounced on her when she was alone in the coach minutes away from home.

On February 1, evening the 23-year-old girl was on her way home for her betrothal to be held at her residence the next day. Soumya boarded the ladies compartment of Ernakulam-Shornur passenger train No. 56608 from Ernakulam Town railway station.

As the train left Ernakulam station, Soumya got busy chatting with Rejula, a native of Mullurkkara who was travelling with her children. The family alighted at Mullurkkara railway station at around 8.18 pm.
Soumya then moved to the next compartment. The train reached the next railway station, Vallathol Nagar at 8.27 pm and stopped there for a while.

At that time, Soumya was alone in the compartment unaware of the fact that Govindachamy had already spotted her.

He was also travelling in the same train in one of the general compartment adjacent to the ladies one. When the train began to move around 8.33 pm, Govindachamy entered the ladies compartment and pounced on Soumya.

She tried to resist the attack and cried for help. But there was no one to listen to her cries. Govindachamy pushed her out of the moving train and later he too jumped out.

The seriously injured Soumya who was lying in a pool of blood, was lifted and taken on the railway tracks and raped.

Meticulous argument by A. Sureshan

It was the strong and meticulous argument of Special Public Prosecutor A. Sureshan that convinced the court to award capital punishment to the Govindachamy.

Sureshan had presented two copies of judgments in the eight convictions, details of which were produced by Chennai fingerprint bureau sub-inspector Malathy, to conclusively prove that Govindachamy was a habitual offender.

He also submitted a copy of another judgment to prove Govindachamy’s criminal background.

Sureshan said he was happy that the court accepted all the arguments and evidences produced by the prosecution. Hailing the media and the police for playing a supportive role, he said that Govindachamy was unwilling to reform himself and desisted from committing offences especially against women commuters.

To prove this the prosecution had filed a petition before the court to cross-examine two more witnesses as per CrPC even after the court had found the accused guilty. According to Mr Sureshan Govindachamy had earlier been convicted in several cases in Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh.

The court had also allowed the prosecution to cross examine two fingerprint bureau experts before pronouncing the sentence. This strengthened the prosecution case and ensured maximum punishment to the guilty.