SHANMUGAYYA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the four appellants who were arrayed as A.1 to A.4 in S.C. 155 of 1984, on the file of the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Madurai, were tried on seven charges. The first charge was framed against all of them under Section 120-B Indian Penal Code on the allegation that on or about 18th December 1983, all the appellants conspired to commit theft in the house of P.W. 2 Subramaniam and if there was resistance to commit murder to achieve their object. The 2nd charge under Section 457 Indian Penal Code was framed against A.2 to A.4 alleging that they had committed the offence of lurking house trespass, late in the night, in order to commit theft, on 18th December, 1983. The3rd charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code was also framed against A.2 to A.4 for having caused the death of Kaveriammal while committing robbery. The 4th charge under Section 302 read with Section 109 Indian Penal Code indicated A.1 for having abetted commission of murder of Kaveriammal by A.2 to A.4. The 5th and 6th charges were framed against A.2 to A.4 under Sections 394 and 392 Indian Penal Code respectively. (P.W. 1 and the deceased). The last charge was framed against A.1 under Section 392 and Section 394 Indian Penal Code read with Section 109 Indian. Penal Code.

(2.) After an elaborate trial, the learned Sessions Judge round all the appellants guilty of all the charges. Accordingly they were convicted and each one or them was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life on the first charge (Section 120-B I.P.C). Under charge 2, A.2 to A.4 were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years. A2 to A4 under charge 3 and A.1 under charge 4 were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life (Section 302 and Section 302 read with Section 109 I.P.C). Under charges 5 and 6, A.2 to A.4 were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years (Sections 394 and 392 I.P.C) and under the last charge, A.1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years (Sec. 392 and 394 I.P.C). The substantive sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently.

(3.) The prosecution case needs narration Krishnasami (A.2) is the brother-in-law of Shanmughayya (A. 1). Muthupandi (A.3) is the son-in-law of A.1 and Ramachandran (A.4) is stated to be a friend and associate of A.1. P.W. 1 Kamalammal is the wife of P.W. 2 Subramaniam. Deceased Kaveriammal was the mother of P.W. 2 and mother-in-law of P.W. 1. P.W. 5 Gurumurthy is the son of P.Ws. 1 and 2. P.W. 7 Anuradha is the wife of P.W. 5. P.W. 3 Venkatachalam Was residing adjacent to the house of P.W. 2. He was then the Head-master of the Corporation Senior Secondary School, Madurai. P.W. 4 Balachandran is the son of P.W. 3. P.W.2 Subramaniam was residing at Kamalathope Street, Madurai along with his mother deceased Kaveriammal and his wife P.W. 1 Kamalammal. The said house was owned by P.W. 2. His son P.W. 5 and his daughter-in-law P.W. 7 were residing separately at South Krishnan Koil Street, Madurai. P.W. 2 served as Assistant Divisional Engineer in the Electricity Board before he retired. A.1 was known to the family of P.W. 2 for over 25 years. It was P.W. 2, who had obtained a job in the Electricity Board for A.1, while he was in service. A.1 had worked under P.W. 2 at several places where the latter was posted. Even after retirement A.1 used to visit the residence of P.W. 2 quite often and do odd jobs entrusted to him by the members of the family of P.W. 2. At or about the time of occurrence, he was working as a First Grade Mechanic in the Electricity Board at Madurai.