MUTHUKUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall govern the following four appeals namely C.A.Nos.416/2008 by A-3, 438/2008 by A-4, 439/2008 by A-2 and 161/2010 by A-1. All these appellants ranked as A-1 to A-4 respectively, along with A-5 stood charged, tried, found guilty and awarded punishment as stated infra: ACCUSED CHARGES FINDING PUNISHMENT A-1 to A-5 120-B of IPC Guilty No separate sentence A-1 to A-4 341 of IPC Guilty 1 month RI A-1 to A-4 302 of IPC Guilty under Sec.302 r/w 120(B) IPC Life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.10000/- and default sentence A-1 to A-4 201 of IPC Guilty 5 years RI with a fine of Rs.2000/- and default sentence A-5 302 read with 120-B of IPC Guilty Life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.10000/- and default sentence

(2.) THE short facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals can be stated as follows: (a) P.W.1 is the father of the deceased. He was a resident of Amman Koil Street, Ooralvoimozhi Village. He had three sons and two daughters, and one of his sons by name Rasiah, the deceased in the case, married A-5.A-5 developed illicit intimacy with A-1, which came to the knowledge of the family members. THEy warned them. Despite the same, it continued. THEreafter, the deceased and A-5 were living separately. THE deceased was working as a loadman in the Fish Company where A-1 was also working.A-1 and A-5 found the deceased as a hurdle to the intimacy. THEn they planned to finish him off. THEy sought the help of A-2 to A-4, and they hatched up a conspiracy as per which they should part with Rs.60000/- in toto out of which Rs.30000/- was actually paid. (b) Pursuant to the conspiracy, on 5.7.2006 at about 8.30 P.M., when the deceased was proceeding in his cycle to the fish company for attending his regular work, A-1 restrained him and pushed him down. When he fell down, A-2 to A-4 caught hold of him, and A-1 attacked him with the spade indiscriminately as a result of which, he died at the spot. Subsequently, A-1 to A-4 took the dead body to a nearby barren land and buried the same. THEy also threw the cycle and spade in the well nearby and fled away from the place of occurrence. (c) P.W.1 and his relatives after making a search of the deceased, proceeded to the respondent police station and P.W.1 gave a complaint, Ex.P1, on 8.7.2006 at about 1300 hours.P.W.19, the Sub Inspector of Police, who was on duty that time, received the complaint, Ex.P1, and registered a case in Crime No.127 of 2006 for man missing. THE printed FIR, Ex.P18, was despatched to the Court. (d) On receipt of the copy of the FIR, P.W.21, the Inspector of Police of that Circle, took up investigation. Pending the investigation, A-1 was arrested on 11.7.2006, by P.W.21, the Investigator. He came forward to give a confessional statement in the presence of witnesses. THE same was recorded. THE admissible part of the confessional statement is marked as Ex.P13.THEn he took the Investigator and witnesses to the place where the dead body was buried. As far as that place was concerned, the Investigator prepared an observation mahazar, Ex.P3, and also a rough sketch, Ex.P20. THEreafter, a message was sent to the Tahsildar, P.W.20. (e) On receipt of the copy of the FIR, P.W.20 proceeded to the spot and caused exhumation of the dead body. Following the same, a requisition was given to P.W.16, the Doctor, who conducted the postmortem and has issued a postmortem certificate, Ex.P16.THE Doctor has given his final opinion under Ex.P17 that the deceased died of complications of the multiple injuries sustained by him. THEn the case was altered to Sec.302 of IPC, and the alteration report, Ex.P22, was sent to the Court. (f) Following the same, A-1 also took the investigation party to the nearby well wherefrom he produced M.O.6, cycle, and M.O.7, spade, which were also recovered under a cover of mahazar. THEn he was sent for judicial remand. From the confessional statement of A-1, the Investigator came to know about the involvement of the other accused, and A-5 was arrested on the same day. She gave a confessional statement, which was recorded. (g) A-2, A-3 and A-4 were arrested on 12.7.2006. A-2 gave a confessional statement voluntarily, and the same was recorded. THE admissible part is marked as Ex.P11. In the presence of witnesses, he produced Rs.30000/-, M.Os.8 to 37, which were recovered under a cover of mahazar. THEy were sent for judicial remand. (h) THE further investigation was taken up by P.W.22, the Inspector of Police. He examined the witnesses and recorded their statements. On completion of the investigation, the Investigator filed the final report.

(3.) ADDED further the learned Counsel that as far as A-1 was concerned, according to the Investigator, he was arrested on 11.7.2006, and he gave a confessional statement, and the same was recorded in the presence of witnesses, and then he took the police party to identify the place where the dead body was buried that according to the witnesses and also the Investigator, he actually identified the place where the dead body was buried at 12.00 P.M., and immediately he was sent for judicial remand but, according to the Tahsildar, P.W.20, the dead body was exhumed in the afternoon, and at that time, A-1 was not available at all that under the circumstances, the evidence that he identified the dead body was of no avail, and hence with regard to the identity of the dead body, there was no one to speak.