S KAMARAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge is made to a judgment of the Principal Sessions Division, Pudukottai, made in S.C.No.34 of 2009 whereby the sole accused/appellant stood charged under Sections 294(b) and 302 of IPC, tried, found guilty as per the charges and awarded life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1000/- and default sentence under Sec.302 IPC and a fine of Rs.250/- with default sentence under Sec.294(b) IPC.

(2.) Short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated thus: (a) P.W.1 is the brother of the deceased Natarajan. P.W.4 is a close relative of the deceased. P.Ws.1 and 4 and the deceased were the residents of Kummupatti. P.Ws.2 and 3 are the residents of Chettipatti. P.Ws.1 and 4 and the deceased went to Chettipatti to eke their livelihood. P.Ws.1 to 5 and the deceased went to Keeranur on 1.5.2008, to attend a festival. At about 4.30 P.M., when they were standing nearby Keeranur Bus Stand, the appellant/accused who came there in a drunken mood, dashed on the deceased. When the deceased questioned the same, the appellant/accused after uttering filthy words, got into the nearby shop and took a soori knife and stabbed the deceased on different parts of the body. P.Ws.1 to 5 who all witnessed the occurrence, chased him; but the accused who was having a knife in hand, intimidated them. Then the severely injured Natarajan was taken to the hospital where he was declared dead by the Doctor. (b) P.W.1 proceeded to the respondent police station, where P.W.14 was the Sub Inspector of Police on duty. On the strength of Ex.P1, the report, given by P.W.1, a case came to be registered in Crime No.122 of 2008 under Sec.302 of IPC. The printed FIR, Ex.P10, was despatched to the Court. (c) On receipt of the copy of the FIR, P.W.15, the Inspector of Police of that Circle, took up investigation, proceeded to the spot, made an inspection and prepared an observation mahazar, Ex.P2, and also a rough sketch, Ex.P11. Then he conducted inquest on the dead body of Natarajan in the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars at the mortuary and prepared an inquest report, Ex.P12. He also recovered from the place of occurrence bloodstained earth and sample earth under a cover of mahazar. The dead body was photographed through P.W.7, the Photographer. M.O.7 series are the photos. (d) Pursuant to the requisition made, P.W.8, the Civil Assistant Surgeon, attached to the Government District Head Quarters Hospital, Pudukkottai, has conducted autopsy on the dead body of Natarajan and has issued a postmortem certificate, Ex.P5, wherein he has opined that the deceased would appear to have died of multiple injuries and injuries to vital organs and shock. (e) Pending investigation, on 3.5.2008 at about 11.00 A.M., the accused was arrested when he was under treatment. The confessional statement voluntarily given by him was recorded, and he was sent for judicial remand. All the material objects were sent for chemical analysis. Accordingly, they were subjected to which brought forth two reports namely Ex.P8, the chemical analyst's report, and Ex.P13, the serologist's report. On completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer filed the final report.

(3.) The case was committed to Court of Session, and necessary charges were framed. In order to substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined 15 witnesses and also relied on 16 exhibits and 13 material objects. On completion of the evidence on the side of the prosecution, the accused was questioned under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. as to the incriminating circumstances found in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, which he flatly denied as false. The trial Court heard the arguments advanced on either side, made scrutiny of the materials, took the view that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and hence entered a judgment of conviction and sentenced him to imprisonment as referred to above. Hence this appeal at the instance of the appellant.