KANAGU A KANAGESWARAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is filed by the first accused in S.C. No. 171 of 1990 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Court, Madurai. He and four others were charged for the offences under Sections 148, 449, 302 read with 34 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code A2 to A5 were acquitted of all the charges. A1 alone was convicted for the offences under Sections 148, 449 and 302 read with 34 of the India Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years, rigorous imprisonment for three years and life imprisonment respectively. THE learned Sessions Judge further ordered that the said sentences should run concurrently. Further, the first accused was acquitted of the offence under Section 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code. As against the same, the first accused preferred C.A. No. 753 of 1990. C.A. No. 91 of 1993 has been filed by the State as against the order of acquittal of A2 to A5.

(2.) THE prosecution case is as follows: PW1 is the first wife of the deceased and PW2 is the second wife of the deceased. Both of them are the eyewitnesses to the occurrence. On 27.6.1989 at about 9 AM, the deceased returned home from Paikara. At that time, he was sitting in the verandah of his house. While he was shaving, he was also eating tender palm. A1 came there with the knife like aruval (MO1). He threatened the deceased that he would finish him. Immediately, the deceased rushed into the house. THE accused 1 to 5 followed him into the house and attacked with MO1 aruval; MO3 knife; MO4 iron rod; MO5 surl knife; and MO6 aruval. PW2 was also present there. Immediately thereafter, all the accused ran away. THE deceased died on the spot.

(3.) THE Committal Magistrate, after having found that the case is exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, committed the same to the Sessions Court. Before the Sessions Court, 12 witnesses were examined; 36 exhibits were marked and 6 material objects were produced. THE learned Sessions Judge, after considering the oral and documentary evidence, found the appellant/the first accused alone guilty of the offences under Sections 148, 449 and 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. THE Learned Sessions Judge acquitted A2 to A5 of all the charges, as there was no evidence to show that PW1 and PW2 knew them and there was no identification parade and since there was a doubt regarding the eyewitnesses identifying A2 to A5, they were given the benefit of doubt.