MAHESH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused is the appellant. The appeal is against the conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence for life.

(2.) THE facts of the case as per the prosecution are as follows : one Kaliappa Gounder and Subramania Gounder are brothers and sons of Sankarappa Gounder. They are residents of Somanathapuram Village, Pollachi Taluk. Sankarappa Gounder had four daughters, one of them being Rukmani, whose son is Mahesh @ Maheshkumar, the accused/appellant in this appeal. All the three male members of the family have partitioned their joint family property in the year 1961 under Ex. P. 2. Thereafter, an extent of 5-1/2 acres of lands which fell to the share of the father namely Sankarappa Gounder was leased out to P. W. 2 namely Subramania Gounder. Rukmani, the daughter of Sankarappa Gounder, after marriage, came away from her husband and was living with her father along with her three children for the past twenty years. Sankarappa Gounder, later on obtained a release of the lease from P. W. 2 and from then on, there was a dispute between Rukmani and P. W. 2 in reference to the land. Rukmani filed a suit O. S. No. 735 of 1989 against P. W. 2 for a permanent injunction, which was dismissed as per Ex. P. 4 dated 2. 3. 1992. Her appeal A. S. No. 24 of 1992 before the Sub-court was also dismissed as per Ex. P. 6 dated 11. 12. 1992. Thereafter, on 31. 12. 1992, Sankarappa Gounder executed a sale deed, Ex. P. 7 in favour of the son-in-law of Rukmani namely Sakthi Ganapathy. During this period of civil litigation, there were criminal cases filed by Rukmani against P. W. 2 in Crime No. 128 of 1990, in which P. W. 2 was acquitted as per Ex. P. 31. Ex. P. 8 series are complaints given by P. W. 2 against Rukmani. Ex. P. 9 series are statements made by both the parties stating that they will settle the matter before the civil court.

(3.) ON 21. 3. 1993 at 8. 15 am, while the son-in-law of P. W. 2, Thirugnanasambandamurthy @ Murthy was returning from his field through Somanathapuram Mudhiyamadai Road, the accused came behind from a bush, armed with a billhook, cut at the head, neck, leg and hand, one after another of Thirugnanasambandamurthy. At that time, P. W. 1, who was coming 50 feet behind Thirugnanasambandamurthy and P. W. 2, who was coming 100 feet in front of Thirugnanasambandamurthy, saw the occurrence. On their shouting, the accused ran away along with the billhook. Finding Thirugnanasambandamurthy dead on the spot, P. W. 1 went to the Anaimalai Police Station, which is six kilometers away and gave a complaint, Ex. P. 1. The First Information Report was prepared on the basis of this complaint. Crime No. 113 of 1993 was registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code at 9 am on 21. 3. 1993. P. W. 9, the Investigating Officer, after getting the information and collecting the F. I. R. , Ex. P. 23, went to the spot at 10. 30 am on 21. 3. 1993 and commenced the investigation. He prepared Ex. P. 10, observation magazar, sketch, Ex. P. 27, conducted inquest on the dead body between 11. 30 am to 1. 30 pm, prepared a report, Ex. P. 28 and sent the body for post-mortem examination. He also recovered the blood stained soil under Ex. P. 11. The accused was arrested on 22. 3. 1993 and on the basis of his confession, Ex. P. 12, M. O. 3, the billhook was recovered in the presence of witnesses under magazar, Ex. P. 13. The Investigating Officer recovered, on the same day, the blood stained shirt and lungi under M. Os. 6 and 7 before the attesting witnesses under Ex. P. 14 magazar.