PAPPAN DAMODARAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PAPPAN Damodaran who is the appellant in Criminal Appeal 31 was tried by the learned Sessions Judge of Alleppey for causing the death of his wife, Bhargavi who was in an advanced stage of pregnancy and also for causing the death of her quick unborn child, offences punishable under Sections 301 and 316 of the Travancore Penal Coda corresponding to Sections 302 and 316, I. P. C. The learned Sessions Judge while finding that the appellant caused the death of his wife found that the offence amounted only to culpable homicide not amounting to murder falling under Part 1 of Section 303, T. P. C. (304 I. P. C.) and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 100 with the direction that in default to pay the fine he should undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The appellant was also found guilty under Section 316 and in respect of the offence he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 50/ -. In default to payment of this fine he has to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. He is undergoing imprisonment in the Central Jail and has preferred his petition of appeal from there. Though at the trial he had not admitted the commission of these crimes in his memorandum of appeal he does net dispute the act attributed to him by the prosecution but states he did it in a fit of temper caused by his wife's immoral ways. All that he seeks at the hands of the appellate Court is that he should be dealt with more leniently than what the trial Court has done.

(2.) CRIMINAL Appeal 111 is by the State and is directed against the acquittal of the appellant of the charge of murder. According to the State there was absolutely no justification to reduce the offence to one of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. These appeals were heard together and Sri C. I. Simon to whom the Court assigned the accused's brief presented the defence case very well.

(3.) THAT Bhargavi, the wife of the accused died of the injuries she sustained at the hands of the accused admits of no doubt on the evidence in the case. The testimony of P. W. 1 the deceased's mother and the statement the deceased herself made to the Police which formed the First Information Report clearly show that the accused gave Bhargavi two cuts with a sickle one on the head and the other on the neck. The occurrence was at about 4 P. M. on 1. 2. 1951 and Bhargavi died at about 4. 15 P. M. on 2. 2. 1951. That her death was the direct result of the injuries caused to her is amply Droved by the medical evidence in the case. In his statement before the trial Court the accused admitted all but giving these cuts to Bhargavi. The circumstances leading to it as also the incidents that followed it are admitted by him leaving a void as it were with reference to the occurrence proper. However in his memorandum of appeal he has categorically admitted that he caused the death of Bhargavi and in view of that statement it is unnecessary to enter into greater details concerning the proof of the occurrence.