STATE Vs. NONDI PALANI ALIAS PALANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STATE appeals challenging a judgment of acquittal of the respondent made in S.C.No.27 of 2008 on the file of the Additional Sessions Division, Fast Track Court, Vellore, whereby the sole accused/respondent stood charged under Sections ., ., ., . r/w ., ., . (two counts), . and . of IPC, tried and on trial, acquitted of all the charges levelled against him.

(2.) SHORT facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows: (a) P.W.1 was the daughter of the first deceased (D1) Seenan @ Seenivasan. She was residing along with the family members at Koodapattu Village. Vasantha was his wife and Ramajiammal was the mother of D1 Seenan. Sundarammal and Kannammal were neighbours. The respondent/accused was originally employed in the house of Seenan, and subsequently his services were terminated. (b) On the date of occurrence i.e., 3.5.1978, at about 8.00 P.M., Seenan, P.W.1 and her mother Vasantha were all inside the house. Seenan was taking his dinner. At that time, Ramajiammal, Sundarammal and Kannammal were sitting outside the house and chatting. Seenan after taking his dinner, came out of the house. At that time, the respondent/ accused along with all other accused came over there, caught hold of him and attacked him with the cycle chain. On seeing this, Vasantha raised alarm and shouted not to attack him. Immediately, the accused stabbed Seenan on his chest. Seenan fell down swooned. Within a short span of time, he died. The wife of D1 Vasantha, and also P.W.3 were injured in that incident. (c) All the accused including the respondent/accused, proceeded from the place, and on the way when they were just proceeding, they attacked the second deceased (D2) Nainath Gounder and also P.W.6 and one Govindasamy. They also hurled the country bombs. In that incident, not only Nainath died, but also P.W.6 and the said Govindasamy were seriously injured. The accused also damaged the tractor belonging to one Nagaraj and the motorcycle which belonged to P.W.5, and thereafter, they fled away from the place of occurrence. (d) The said Vasantha, P.Ws.3 and 6 and the said Govindasamy were given treatment. The accident register copies in their regard are marked as Exs.P12, P16, P22 and P25 respectively. (e) P.W.18, the Sub Inspector of Police, attached to the Taluk PS, Tirupattur, received a phone message at about 9.45 P.M. from one Ramachandran about the above crimes committed by all the accused who were naxalites. He after making an entry in the G.D., proceeded to Koodapattu Village and recorded the statement of Vasantha, the wife of D1. On the strength of the said report marked as Ex.P26, he registered a case in Crime No.314/78 under Sections ., ., ., ., . and . of IPC. The printed FIR, Ex.P27, was despatched to the Court. (f) P.W.19, the Inspector of Police of the Circle, on receipt of the copy of the FIR, took up investigation, proceeded to the spot, made an inspection of the first incident place namely the house of Seenan, and prepared an observation mahazar, Ex.P28, and also a sketch, Ex.P29. Then he recovered 12 pamphlets under Ex.P30 mahazar. On 4.5.1978 he conducted inquest on the dead body of Seenan in the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars, and the inquest report prepared by him, is marked as Ex.P31. Then he sent the dead body to the Government Hospital for the purpose of postmortem along with a requisition Ex.P32 through a Head Constable. He recovered the material objects under a cover of Ex.P34, mahazar from that place of occurrence. (g) P.W.19 also prepared an observation mahazar at the place where the telephone wire was disconnected. Ex.P36 is the said observation mahazar. Thereafter he proceeded to the place where the second incident has taken place in which Ninath Gounder and others were attacked, and prepared an observation mahazar, Ex.P37, and also a rough sketch, Ex.P38. He recovered all the material objects from that place of occurrence under a cover of Ex.P41 mahazar. Then he proceeded to the house of P.W.5, Ilayaraja, where the tractor and motorcycle were damaged. He prepared Ex.P43 mahazar, and the place of occurrence was photographed and photographs were taken. He interrogated all the witnesses and recorded their statements. All the material objects were sent to the Court under Form 95. He also sent a requisition on 6.5.1978, to the Explosives Department for the purpose of analysis, and the report is also marked as Ex.P51. (h) Despite treatment, Nainath Gounder died on 6.5.1978. On receipt of the intimation, the Investigator altered the provisions of law, and the altered FIR is marked as Ex.P52. Then he conducted inquest on the dead body of Nainath, and the inquest report prepared by him, is marked as Ex.P53. He sent a requisition, Ex.P54, to the hospital for the purpose of autopsy. (i) The dead body of Seenan was subjected to postmortem by one Dr.Jatti, attached to the Government Hospital, Tirupattur. Since the said medical person has gone to abroad, P.W.16, the Doctor, was examined. The postmortem certificate, issued by Dr.Jatti, is marked through P.W.16 as Ex.P8. The Doctor has opined that Seenan died of shock and haemorrhage due to the injuries sustained by him. (j) Equally the dead body of Nainath Gounder was subjected to autopsy by P.W.10, the Doctor, attached to the Government Hospital, Tirupattur, and the postmortem certificates issued by him is marked as Ex.P2. The Doctor has opined that the deceased would appear to have died of shock and haemorrhage due to the injuries sustained by him. (k) All the material objects were subjected to chemical analysis by the Forensic Sciences Department. The chemical analyst's report is Ex.P59, while the serologist's report is Ex.P60. (l) The further investigation, pursuant to the orders of the D.G.P., was entrusted to the "Q" Branch. One Krishnasamy, the Inspector of Police in "Q" Branch, took up the investigation. P.W.20, during the relevant time, was serving as the Sub Inspector of Police under the said Krishnasamy. P.W.20 knew the handwriting of Krishnasamy. Since Krishnasamy was not alive, P.W.20 gave evidence about the further investigation done by the said Krishnasamy. According to him, the Inspector Krishnasamy who took up investigation, on 16.5.1978, arrested the accused Jayachandran and also Sampath. On 18.5.1978, the accused Chandrasekaran was arrested, and on 22.5.1978, the Investigator examined 25 witnesses. On 23.5.1978, he examined 5 more witnesses. On 24.5.1978, he examined 12 more witnesses and recorded their statements. On 25.5.1978, he recorded the statements of 16 witnesses, and thereafter, on 5.6.1978, he arrested the accused by name Shanmugan. On 11.6.1978, he arrested the accused Krishnan, Elumalai and Samiyar @ Samraj. He examined Dr.Nandakumar who gave treatment to the injured witnesses, and he also examined Dr.Jatti who conducted postmortem on the dead body of Seenan. He also recorded the statement of Dr.Chandrasekar who conducted autopsy on the dead body of Nainath. On 27.6.1978, he gave a requisition for the conduct of identification parade. Accordingly, test identification parade was conducted. On completion of investigation, the Investigator filed the final report.

(3.) THE Court heard the learned Counsel for the respondent/accused who put forth his submissions elaborately in his sincere attempt of sustaining the judgment of acquittal by the trial Court.