(1.) THE sole accused in a case of murder appeals against the judgment of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam, wherein he was found guilty as per the charge and awarded the sentence of life imprisonment.
(2.) SHORT facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are: (a) The deceased Saroja is the wife of the accused. They along with their three sons and one daughter were living at Mission Street , Tharangampadi. All the three sons were employed. P. W. 3 Holkarasan , is the second son. P. W. 2 Kalamani , was living in the opposite house. On the date of occurrence namely 28. 7. 2000, all the three sons went towards their job, and the third son was returning at about 7. 00 P. M. Just before the occurrence, the deceased was moving out of the house. The accused was questioning her "where are you going with full make-up". She replied that she was going to see his brother and added filthy language. Immediately, the accused slapped her. In return, she spitted on his face. Then, the accused dragged her from outside the house to inside. The incident was witnessed by P. W. 2. The accused took her inside, kicked her, pushed her down, took a stone and attacked her on the back. Then, the accused turned her front, took a grinding stone and attacked her on the chest, out of which she died. P. W. 2, when she was standing outside, saw P. W. 3 coming towards the house. She narrated the incident and asked him to just go inside and see what had happened. When P. Ws. 2 and 3 were just nearing the house, the accused came out of the house and fled away. When P. Ws. 2 and 3 went inside the house, they could see only the dead body of the deceased. (b) The next morning i. e. , on 29. 7. 2000, when P. W. 1 balachandran, Village Administrative Officer (V. A. O.) of Santhangudi Village , was in his office, the deceased came there and volunteered to give a confessional statement as to the occurrence. He narrated the incident. The statement of the accused was recorded by P. W. 1, which is marked as Ex. P1. Along with his report Ex. P2, P. W. 1 proceeded to Poraiyar Police Station and produced the accused also. P. W. 11 Ravichandran, Inspector of Police, who was present that time, received Exs. P1 and P2, on the strength of which, he registered a case in Crime No. 507 of 2000 against the accused under Sec. 302 of I. P. C. The first Information Report Ex. P14 was despatched to the Court. The Inspector at about 7. 15 A. M. , made an inspection of the scene of occurrence and prepared an observation mahazar Ex. P5 and a rough sketch Ex. P15. The place of occurrence was photographed through P. W. 5 Karthikeyan, a Photographer. The photos and the negatives were marked as Exs. P3 and P4 respectively. In the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars, the Investigating Officer conducted the inquest on the dead body between 9 A. M. and 12 P. M. and prepared Ex. P16 inquest report. A requisition Ex. P7 was forwarded to the Government Hospital through P. W. 9 Ramalingam, Grade I Constable, who carried the dead body and handed over the same to the doctor. (c) P. W. 7 Dr. Durairaj, Civil Surgeon, attached to the Government Hospital , Porayar, on receipt of Ex. P7 requisition, conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and found the following injuries: External Injuries: 1. An abrasion of 2 cm x 1 cm over the upper part of the left cheek. 2. An abrasion of 2 cm x 1 cm over the left temple region of the face.
(3.) IT is not in dispute that the deceased Saroja died out of homicidal violence. P. W. 7, the Doctor, on requisition by the Investigating officer under Ex. P7, has conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and has given a certificate under Ex. P8 stating that the deceased would appear to have died of injuries to both lungs namely vital organs. IT is pertinent to point out that either before the trial Court or before this Court , the factum that she died out of homicidal violence is not disputed by the appellant. Hence, the Court feels no difficulty in recording a finding that she died on account of homicidal violence.