Founder of school, others seek acquittal in fire tragedy case

Four convicts in the case related to Kumbakonam school fire tragedy that killed 94 children in 2004 today moved the Madras High Court challenging their conviction and sentence by the trial court last month.
The four, including founder of the Sri Krishna Primary School and prime accused Pulavar R Palanisamy, the lone life convict in the sensational case, sought acquittal contending that the source of fire mishap was the kitchen of noon-meal scheme which was not under their control.
When the petitions came up for hearing, Justice S Manikumar and Justice V S Ravi asked Additional Superintendent of Police (Crime) Thanjavur, the sole respondent, to reply within three weeks.

Thanjavur Principal District and Sessions Court Judge Mohammed Ali had on July 30 convicted and sentenced Palanisamy to life imprisonment and other petitioners -- his wife and school administrator Saraswathi, headmistress Santhalakshmi and Office Superintendent of District Education Office Thandavan to five years' rigorous imprisonment and fine.
The court had convicted ten accused while acquitting 11 others, most of them government employees. One of the accused was awarded two years jail term and nine others five years.
The Petitioners submitted that the noon-meal scheme was under the control of district collector of Thanjavur and the trial court failed to consider that there was absolutely no evidence that the scheme and staff working under it were directly under the control of the founder or other authorities of the school.

There were material contradictions between the evidences of injured school children and the Investigating Officer.
Also, the trial judge had framed three charges under IPC 285 (negligent conduct with respect to fire or combustible matter); 338 (causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others) and contra one charge had been framed under IPC 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and 120-B (conspiracy).
Petitioners submitted that when according to prosecution, it was only a fire accident, the conviction under various provision of Penal Code was not sustainable.