RAVI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court. Two persons have filed the appeal and the appellant Ravi was A-1 in Criminal Appeal No. 22 of 2007, and Ravi, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 2007 was A3. Ten persons had faced trial before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Kanyakumari. During the pendency of trial one of them i.e. A-10 died and the charge against him had abated. A-5 to A-9 were acquitted by the trial Court and the remaining four were appellants before the High Court. A1 to A4 were convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC').

(2.) Prosecution version in a nutshell are as follows : There was previous enmity between the elder brother of Albert Walter (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) i.e. Robert Victor Singh (P.W. 1) and A1 and one Sasi, residing at R.C. Street, Monday market. There was a case that, A1 had hacked Sasiat his leg. In the murder case related to one Kumar, deceased Albert Walter was implicated as an accused. On 24.12.1991, when P.W.1 and deceased were going near Neyyoor Hospital, A1 to A4 chased the deceased. On 7-1-1992, when P.W. 1, deceased and one Ranjith Singh were coming towards the south from Neyyoor Mission Hospital, opposite to the Primary School, at around 7 or 7.15 in the night, A1 to A4 armed with choppers in their hands chased deceased who ran from north towards the south. Near the house of one Shahul Hameed, A1 to A4 caught hold of deceased. A1 hacked him at his neck, jaw and right cheek. A-2 hacked deceased at his right hand and back. A3 hacked him on his head 3 times with a chopper. A4 hacked him on his abdomen. Consequent to the injuries inflicted by A1 to A4, he died at the very place of occurrence. The occurrence was witnessed by P.W. 1, Ranjith Guna Singh (PW 2) and Jagdeesh Chandran (PW3) in the light shed by the electric light near the place of occurrence. P.W.1, at around 8.30 in the night, went to the Police Station, Eraniel and lodged a written complaint Ex.P.1 signed by him regarding the occurrence. At the time of occurrence Albert Walter was wearing a shirt M.O.1 and a lungi M.O.2. On 7-1-1992, at around 8.30 in the night, when the Sub- Inspector P.W. 13 was on duty in charge of the station, as per the complaint Ex.P-1 given by P.W. 1, a case was registered in Crime No. 10/92 u/S. 302 IPC. The First Information Report and the complaint statement were sent to the Court. The copies of these were sent to the higher officials. When P.W. 17 was in-charge as the Circle Inspector, Eraniel on 7-1-1992, at 2100 hrs., he received the FIR in this case and took up the case for investigation. He visited the place of occurrence at 21.15 hrs and observing it in the presence of the witnesses prepared the observation mahazar Ex.P.2. Shelvasdas (P.W. 6) was present along with him and attested as a witness to Ex. P.2. P.W. 17 prepared the Rough sketch Ex-P.20. He made arrangements for photographing the place of occurrence. He conducted inquest in the presence of the Panchayatdars. The Inquest Report prepared by him is Ex.P.21. During the inquest, P.W. 17 enquired the witnesses. He entrusted the corpse to Selvamani (P.W. 12) Constable with the requisition of conducting post-mortem, Ex.P.14 to the Medical Officer, Colachel. From the place of occurrence, the Inspector P.W.17 seized M.O.3 blood-stained earth, M.O. 4 sample earth and prepared the mahazar Ex-P.3 in the presence of P.W.6 who attested it as a witness. As per the requisition of the Police Department, P.W. 14 took photographs of the place of occurrence. The photos taken by him are M.O.6 series and their negatives M.O.7 series. As per the orders of the Inspector, on 8-1-1992, P.W. 12 took the corpse of Albert Walter under his responsibility, then after the inquest was over, he took the corpse to the doctor and entrusted the same for post-mortem examination. After the postmortem was over, he received the corpse back and handed over the same to its relatives. On 8-1-1992 as per the requisition of the Inspector PW-17 through PW-12, the Doctor (PW-10) conducted the post mortem examination of the corpse at 12 noon. He noticed rigor mortis spread over the corpse and found the following injuries on the corpse.

(3.) Before the High Court the stand about the sustainability of the evidence of PW-1 was reiterated. It was highlighted that he was brother of the deceased and therefore was interested and a partisan witness. The High Court did not accept that plea and found the evidence of PW-1 to be clear and cogent and dismissed the appeal.