When mob takes law into its own hands: another man lynched in Keralam’s Palakkad

When mob takes law into its own hands: another man lynched in Keralam’s Palakkad left The Moolathara lynching reflects a recurring pattern—suspicion becomes accusation, and a crowd assumes the authority to deliver punishment. Satheesh Vellinezhi Satheesh Vellinezhi Illustration for The Hindu Illustration: Satheesh Vellinezhi Spotlight The brutal lynching of an aurally challenged, unidentified man near the Moolathara dam in Keralam’s Palakkad has once again shaken the conscience of society.

Abdul Latheef Naha speaks to investigators, psychiatrists and forensic experts to understand how did a homeless man become the target of a group that took it upon itself to punish him and such incidents are recurring. Palakkad The flesh looked pounded. Contusions piled upon contusions. As forensic surgeon Hithesh Sanker examined the battered body that was laid on the post-mortem table, suspicion gave way to a grim realisation—this was no ordinary death.

The man had been lynched. He had no name. He could not speak. He could communicate only through sign language. Found dead near the Moolathara dam in Keralam’s Palakkad recently, the man in his late 30s bore nearly 50 injuries. He was allegedly stoned and beaten with sticks for sleeping outside a house at Nedumpara. Whatever he had tried to communicate, no one had understood or cared to.

By October 11, 2026 morning, the man, yet unidentified, lay dead. There was no known prior enmity or established offence. The police registered an unnatural death. The post-mortem examination at the Government Medical College Hospital, Thrissur, revealed the brutality of the crime. Similar incidents The killing echoes two other brutal lynching in Keralam—of Madhu, a tribesperson beaten to death in Attappady in 2018 over allegations of stealing food, and of Ram Narayan Baghel, a migrant worker from Chhattisgarh lynched at Walayar in December 2025 on suspicion of theft.

The pattern goes back even further. In 2010, Rajendran, a 34-year-old man described as mentally unstable, was tied to a post and beaten through the night at Peruvemba. He died, and eight accused were sentenced to life imprisonment. Different men, different circumstances, but a chilling common thread—the vulnerable become targets, suspicion becomes a verdict, and a mob assumes the power to punish.

Seven people were booked in connection with the killing. Kathiresan, one of the accused, is alleged to have led the attack. The victim had reportedly been sleeping in front of his house. There were no apparent eyewitnesses. Confession The confession of one accused became a crucial lead, while investigators collected other evidence, including fingerprints. A 10-member special investigation team led by Chittur Deputy Superintendent of Police (Dy.SP) M.

Sasidharan is pursuing the case. “We have extended the search to different parts along the border. We have published the photo of the victim in various groups, including that of ASHAs, SC/ST promoters and local body ward members. We have informed different settlements along the border, both in Keralam and Tamil Nadu,” says Rajeesh S., Circle Inspector of Police, Kozhinjampara. The search for his identity continues, but the killing raises a larger question: how did a homeless man become the target of a group that took it upon itself to punish him?

Recurring pattern The Moolathara lynching reflects a recurring pattern—suspicion becomes accusation, and a crowd assumes the authority to deliver punishment. P. Premnath, former Deputy Director of Prosecution, says India has witnessed numerous cases of mob lynching and cow vigilantism over the past decade. Earlier, prosecutors relied on provisions of the Indian Penal Code covering murder, rioting and unlawful assembly, including Section 149, which holds members of an unlawful assembly liable for offences committed in pursuit of its common object.

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which came into force in July 2024, introduced Section 103(2), which provides for punishment for group murder on specified discriminatory grounds. “Its application depends on the circumstances of each case,” explains Premnath. In its 2018 judgment in Tehseen S. Poonawalla vs Union of India, the Supreme Court laid down measures to prevent and punish lynching, including designated police officers, speedy trials and victim compensation.

Yet such violence persists. “Responsibility should be established through evidence, and those found guilty should face the consequences,” says Premnath. No suspicion or accusation gives a crowd the right to take the law into its own hands. “None has the right to hurt or take anyone’s life,” asserts Anees Ali, outgoing general secretary of the Indian Psychiatric Society’s Kerala unit.

“There is no right to try anyone publicly.” At Moolathara, the man may have been unwanted by those around him. He may have been unable to explain why he was there. Neither circumstance could justify violence. Dayal Narayan, Head of the Department of Psychiatry at Government Medical College Hospital, Manjeri, says aggression is a human instinct, but civilisation depends on learning to control it.

“Humans, like animals, have an instinct for aggression. It manifests in different ways, from road rage to violence on sports fields,” points out Dr. Narayan. Civilisation depends on learning to control these impulses, weigh consequences and resolve conflicts peacefully. But those restraints can fail, he notes. “When people lose trust in social checks and balances, they take the law into their own hands.

Some see it as heroism or an expression of solidarity; others believe they are serving a good cause. The aggressor becomes the hero,” he observes. Once an assault begins, others may join in or reinforce the violence rather than challenge it. The group emboldens individuals, weakening their sense of personal responsibility. “Instead of correcting an action, group members tend to reinforce it,” notes Dr.

Narayan. Dr. Ali identifies personality, social …