MOORTHY Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is the accused in S.C.No.248/2002 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam. By judgment dated 12.12.2002, the learned Judge convicted the appellant under Section 304(i) of IPC and sentenced him to undergo 10 years rigourous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- in default, to undergo one year rigourous imprisonment. Challenging the same, the appellant/accused is before this Court with this appeal.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution are as follows: On 29.7.2001 at about 10.00 a.m. at Pothakudi Village, Jalak Street, in front of one Narayanasamy's house when the deceased Packirisamy was putting Shamiyana with coconut leaves, at that time, the accused came there and tendered a cup of water to drink. THEreafter, he requested a bicycle from the deceased on rental basis to go to nearby place. At that time, the deceased abused the accused by using his caste name. He also further added that whether he is asking the bicycle for going to do a barber work. Immediately on provocation, the accused taken an Aruval which was found nearby and cut him on the back side of his neck. Immediately, thereafter, P.W.1 along with one Ramesh and P.W.2 taken the injured to the hospital. On examination, P.W.7 Doctor has declared that he was brought dead. THEreafter, P.W.1 went to the police station and gave a complaint Ex.P.1. On receipt of the complaint, P.W.9 the then Sub-Inspector of Police registered a case under Section 302 of IPC against the accused and prepared the First Information Report (Ex.P.15). P.W.10 Head Constable handed over the First Information Report to the Judicial Magistrate and the higher officials concerned. P.W.11 Head Constable handed over the dead body of the deceased to the Government Hospital for post mortem and after post mortem, recovered Dhoti (M.O.2), Belt (M.O.3), Banian (M.O.4) and Underwear (M.O.5) under Special Report (Ex.P.16) and handed over the same along with the dead body to P.W.12 Inspector of Police. THEreafter, P.W.12 examined P.W.6 Doctor, P.W.10 Head Constable and P.W.11 and recorded their statements. After that P.W.13, Inspector of Police, who has taken up the further investigation laid charge sheet after completing the investigation against the accused under Section 302 of IPC.

(3.) THE learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) contended that the presence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 cannot be disbelieved and the accused himself has not taken the injured deceased to the hospital. Hence, the judgment of the trial court has to be confirmed.