RANGASAMY ALIAS RANGAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment passed in S. C. No. 331 of 2001 on the file of principal Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, imposed on the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302, I. P. C for having murdered one Chinnan, his father-in-law by cutting with aruval. The accused is the appellant.

(2.) THE prosecution case is as follows: (a) THE appellant/accused is the son-in-law of the deceased Chinnan and on 5. 5. 2000 at about 6. 00 p. m. the accused in a drunken state of mind, demanded money from his father-in-law Chinnan and when Chinnan refused to part with the money, the accused warned him of dire consequences. At about 10. 30 p. m. on the same day, while the deceased was sleeping at the outside the house near the doorstep in E. B. Quarters of Mahalingapuram, pollachi, the accused with the intention of murdering the deceased Chinnan, came there and cut the deceased Chinnan with aruval on his neck indiscriminately as a result of which the deceased Chinnan died on the spot itself and therefore the accused is liable to be punished under Section 302, i. P. C. (b) In support of its case, the prosecution has examined p. Ws. l to 8 of whom P. W. l to 4 are eye-witnesses, P. W. 6 is the mahazar witness, P. W. 6 is the Village Administrative Officer who was present at the time of arrest of the accused, P. W. 7 is the Medical Officer who conducted post mortem examination and P. W. 8 is the Investigating Officer. THE prosecution has also produced Exs. P-1 to P-17 and also material objects, M. Os. 1 to 15. (c) As already noticed, the accused is the son-in-law of the deceased Chinnan, P. W. 1 is the daughter of the deceased and P. W. 2 is the son of P. W. 1 and grandson of the deceased. P. W. 3 is also another grandson of the deceased. P. W. 4 is the daughter of the accused. According to the prosecution, the deceased was having a house at Negamam and he sold the house for a sum of Rs. 25,000 and out of the same, he paid a sum of Rs. 15,000 to the accused and his wife, namely, the daughter of the deceased and kept a sum of rs. 10,000 for himself. After spending the money given to him, the accused demanded money from the deceased Chinnan that resulted in frequent quarrels and on the date of incident, at about 6. 30 p. m. , the accused, in drunken state of mind, demanded money to which the deceased refused and being infuriated by the refusal of the deceased to part with money, the accused warned him with dire consequences and left the place. At about 10. 30 p. m. on the same date, the accused came again and cut the deceased indiscriminately with M. O. 1 aruval which belonged to the deceased. THE occurrence took place in the house of the deceased and so, witnessed by his daughter, P. W. 1 end other witnesses, namely, p. Ws. 2 to 4 who happened to be in the house. After the quarrel in the evening, p. Ws. 3 and 4 remained in the house of the deceased and they were watching television programme along with other inmates when the incident occurred at about 10. 30 p. m. After hearing the noise, when P. Ws. l to 4 came out of the house, they saw the accused cutting the deceased with M. O. 1 aruval an his neck and on seeing them, the accused fled the scene leaving the aruval and his chappals at the place of occurrence. P. W. 1 gave water to her father and after drinking water, the deceased breathed his last. (d) On the next day, that is, 6. 5. 2000 at about 7. 30 a. m. , P. W. 1 went to police station and gave the complaint, Ex. P-l to P. W. 8 inspector of Police. On the basis of Ex. P-1, P. W. 8 registered a case in crime no. 401/2000 of Pollachi Town East Police Station under Section 302, I. P. C. and prepared Express F. I. R. , Ex. P-9 and sent the same to the Judicial Magistrate, pollachi and copies to other higher officials. THEreafter, P. W. 8, Investigating officer, visited the scene of occurrence and prepared Ex. P-10 rough sketch and ex. P-z observation mahazar in the presence or P. W. 5 and one Krishnasami. He caused the scene of occurrence to be photographed and M. O. 11 series are the photographs. He seized from the scene of occurrence M. O. 4 bloodstained earth, m. O. 5 sample earth, M. O. 6 bloodstained wooden log, M. O. 7 polythene mat, M. O. 8 bloodstained grass mat and M. O. 1 aruval under Ex. P-3 mahazar in the presence of p. W. 5 and Krishnasami. He also seized M. O. 2 bloodstained saree from P. W. 1 under ex. P-4 mahazar in the presence of the same witnesses. P. W. 8, Inspector of police conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased from 10 a. m. to 1. 15 p. m. on 6. 5. 2000 in the presence of Panchayatdars and prepared the inquest report Ex. P-11 and also examined P. Ws. l to 4 and others. He sent the dead body for post mortem examination through a Police Head Constable along with Ex. P-7 requisition. (e) P. W. 7 is the Civil Assistant Surgeon attached to the government Hospital, Pollachi. On receipt of Ex. P-7 requisition from P. W. 8, he conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased on 6. 5. 2000 at about 3. 00 p. m. and found the following injuries: ( 1 ) A cut injury over left mandible of 2' ; x 1' ; , involving the bone. ( 2 ) A cut injury or 3' ; x 1' ; x bone deep present on the left side neck below mandible. ( 3 ). A cut injury or 3' ; x 1' ; x bone deep below wound No. 2. P. W. 7 was of the opinion that the deceased would appear to have died of injuries to vital organs, carotid vessel on the left side and spinal column. He issued Ex. P-8 postmortem certificate. He has also stated that the above said injuries would have been caused by M. O. 1 aruval. (f) P. W. 8, Inspector of Police, on 9. 5. 2000 at about 11. 15 a. m. arrested the accused in the Sundarakavundanur village bus stop building which is situate on Pollachi-Darapuram road in the presence of P. W. 6 balasubramanian and one Thangaraj and recorded his statement, the admissible portion of which is marked as Ex. P-5. On the basis of Ex. P-5, the accused took p. W. 8 and his party to the place where he stayed, namely, Kamatchi house and from there he produced M. O. 9 lungi and M. O. 10 bloodstained shirt and P. W. 8 seized them under Ex. P-6 mahazar in the presence of witnesses and after that, p. W. 8 remanded the accused. P. W. 8 examined other witnesses and recorded their statements and he also seized other material objects. He forwarded the material objects along with Ex. P-13 letter to the Judicial Magistrate for sending them for chemical analysis. Ex. P-15 is the Chemical Analyst' ; s report and Exs. P-16 and P-17 are the serologist' ; s reports. After completing the investigation, P. W. 8 laid the charge sheet against the accused.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant also submitted that the charge sheet itself was preferred within a period of five days. It is seen from the records that all the witnesses were examined by the Investigating officer and when the investigation was completed and in the investigation, it was found that the accused committed an offence punishable under Section 302, i. P. C. , the Investigating Officer immediately filed the charge sheet before the judicial magistrate No. 1, Pollachi. We are of the view, the fact that the investigating Officer acted in a proper manner is not a ground to hold that there is suspicion in the accusation made against the accused.