MAHADEVAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge is made to a judgment of the I Additional Sessions Division, Thanjavur, made in S.C.No.436 of 2008 whereby the sole accused/appellant stood charged under Sections 307 (two counts), 324 and 302 of IPC, tried, found guilty under Sections 307 and 302 of IPC and awarded 5 years Rigorous Imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1000/- and default sentence under Sec.307 IPC and life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.2000/- and default sentence under Sec.302 of IPC, while he was acquitted of the other charges.

(2.) The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows: (a) P.W.1 is the brother of the accused. P.W.2 is the wife of P.W.1. P.W.3 is the wife of the deceased Arjunan and also the mother-in-law of the accused. P.W.4 is the son of the deceased. The house of the accused is situated within a furlong from the place of the prosecution witnesses. The daughter of P.W.3 was given in marriage to the appellant/accused, and he used to come home in a drunken mood. He was not properly maintaining the daughter of P.W.3. (b) On the date of occurrence that was 19.2.2008, at about 10.00 P.M., P.W.3 went to the house of the appellant/accused and scolded him that he was not maintaining his daughter properly, and his activities were not only irregular, but also he was always in drunken mood, and matrimony was disturbed. At about 11.00 P.M., P.W.3, her husband the deceased, and P.Ws.1 and 2 were all sitting outside the house and were chatting. At that time, he came there and attacked all of them. All of them sustained injuries. When P.W.3, the wife of the deceased, was being attacked, the deceased husband intervened and came to the rescue, and not satisfied with his act, he attacked the deceased with an aruval indiscriminately and caused his death instantaneously. Immediately, all of them were taken to the Government Hospital, Kumbakonam, and they were all given treatment by P.W.5, the Doctor. The accident register copy in respect of the deceased is marked as Ex.P2. The accident register copies in respect of P.Ws.1 to 3 are marked as Exs.P3, P5 and P7 respectively. (c) An intimation was given to the respondent police station. On receipt of the same, P.W.16, the Sub Inspector of Police, rushed to the hospital and recorded the statement from P.W.1 which is marked as Ex.P16. On the strength of Ex.P16, he registered a case in Crime No.52 of 2008 under Sections 294(b), 307 and 324 of IPC. The printed FIR, Ex.P17, was sent to the Court. (d) P.W.18, the Inspector of Police of that Circle, on receipt of the copy of the FIR, took up investigation, proceeded to the spot, made an inspection and prepared observation mahazars, Ex.P9 and P11, and also rough sketches, Ex.P19 and P20. In the meantime, Arjunan died on 21.2.2008. On receipt of the death intimation, the Investigator altered the case into Sec.302 of IPC. The alteration report, Ex.P21, was sent to the Court. Then he conducted inquest on the dead body of Arjunan in the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared an inquest report, Ex.P22. A requisition was forwarded to the hospital authorities for the purpose of autopsy. (e) P.W.17, the Tutor in Forensic Medicine, Thanjavur Medical College, on receipt of the said requisition, conducted autopsy on the dead body of Arjunan and has issued a postmortem certificate, Ex.P18, with his opinion that the deceased would appear to have died due to head injury involving the vital organ brain. (f) Pending investigation, the accused was arrested on 22.2.2008. He came forward to give a confessional statement which was recorded. The admissible part is marked as Ex.P12, pursuant to which he produced M.O.1, aruval, which was recovered under a cover of mahazar. He was sent for judicial remand. All the material objects recovered from the place of occurrence and from the dead body and M.O.1, aruval, were subjected to chemical analysis which brought forth two reports namely Ex.P14, the chemical analyst's report, and Ex.P15, the serologist's report, and they were also placed before the Judicial Magistrate's Court. On completion of investigation, the Investigator 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 18 witnesses and also relied on 22 exhibits and 5 material objects. On completion of 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. No defence witness was examined. But one document was marked on his side. The trial Court heard the arguments advanced on either side, and took the view that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and hence found him guilty and awarded life imprisonment which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court.