PONNUSAMY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the accused 1 to 4 against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli in Sessions Case No.176 of 1989. Pending appeal, fourth accused died and hence the appeal filed by him abates. The other three appellants 1 to 3 will hereinafter be referred to as the 1st accused - A1, 2nd accused - A2 and 3rd accused A3 for the sake of convenience. In the aforesaid Sessions Case, six accused including A1, A2 and A3 were tried by the learned Sessions Judge for committing the murder of Velayutham, hereinafter referred to as the deceased (D) at 7.30 a.m. on 4.4.1988. Charge No.1 was framed against A1 to A6 under Sec.147, I.P.C., Charge No.2 was framed against A1 to A5 for the offence punishable under Sec.148, I.P.C. and Charge No.3 was framed against A1 to A5 under Sec.302 read with 34, I.P.C. for causing the death of Velayutham and sharing the common intention of causing his death. Charge No.4 was framed against A6 under Sec.302 read with 109, I.P.C. and Charge No.5 was framed against A1 under Sec.324, I.P.C. for causing injury to one Arumugam, P.W.3. The learned Sessions Judge, on considering the oral and documentary evidence, convicted A1 to A4 under Secs.147, 148 and 302 read with 34, I.P.C. However, he acquitted A5 and A6 finding that they are not guilty of the offences for which charges were framed against them. A1 was acquitted of the offence under Sec.324, I.P.C. Therefore, A1 to A4 were sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment for the offences under Sec.147, and Sec.148 each and with imprisonment for life for the offence under Sec.302, I.P.C. read with 34, sentences to run concurrently. Against this as stated above, this appeal has been filed.

(2.) THE facts are as follows: THE deceased is a resident of Kilikoodu Village. P.W.1 is his brother. P.W.2 is the relative of the deceased. (D) in short) A1 and A2 are brothers. A3 to A6 are friends of A1 and A2. A1 and A2 were cultivating tenants of 58 cents of land belonging to one Konar. THE lands belonging to P.W.1 and "D" were adjacent to this land. When Konar wanted to sell the land, he offered to sell the land first to A2. But A2 said that he did not have funds at that time. THEreafter, the said Konar offered to sell the land to "D" and P.W.1. "D" and P.W.1 agreed to purchase the land, if A2 had no objection. Since A2 agreed for their purchase, "D" and P.W.1 purchased the land. After purchase, when they began to cultivate the land, A1 said that since they had the tenancy rights, no one else should enter upon the land. Because of this, P.W.1 and "D" could not cultivate the land. THEre was a Panchayat in which it was decided that A1 should hand over the land to "D" and P.W.1 and compensation of Rs.3,000 should also be paid. A1 and A2 did not agree to this award of Panchayat. When "D" offered to pay over and above Rs.4,000 that was also refused. THEre was another panchayat. Inspite of this, A1 and A2 continued to give trouble to the family of D and they constantly threatened to kill "D".

(3.) MEANWHILE, on 11.4.1988, A1 to A4 had surrendered before the Ariyalur Judicial Magistrate. After receiving the Post Mortem Certificate Ex.P.8 and the Chemical Analysis Report Ex.P.11 and the Serologist Report Ex.P.12, P.W.14 filed the Charge Sheet on 28.4.1988 against the accused under Secs.147, 148, 324 and 302 read with 34, I.P.C. A5 who was also absconding was produced before the Court after the Charge Sheet was filed. The learned Judicial Magistrate on receipt of the Charge Sheet committed the case to the learned District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli.