PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Vs. ANNAMALAI UDAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal preferred by the State against the acquittal of the two accused by the learned Stationary Magistrate, Omalur in C. C. No. 525 of 1952, on his file. The two accused were tried by the learned Magistrate for an offence under S. 325, I. P. C. The police filed a charge-sheet against the two accused for the murder of one Velayudam who died as a result of injuries he received on 13-12-1951. The case was taken as a Preliminary Register case. But after evidence was let in, the learned Magistrate passed an order on 30-4-1952, holding that only a prima facie case against the two accused under S. 325, I. P. C. was made out and discharged the accused of the offence of murder. A charge for, an offence under S. 325, I. P. C. was framed against the accused and they were tried for that offence.

(2.) The prosecution case is this. The first accused was a forest guard. The second accused was his henchman assisting accused 1 in the collection of "mamul" payment from villagers who were allowed by accused 1 to collect fuel from the Reserve Forest without a permit. The learned Magistrate finds that accused 1 had been demanding mamools from the deceased and other persons. It appears that the deceased, Velayudham, had committed default in the payment of mamul to accused 1 for '2 months prior to the occurrence which was on 13-12-1051. The accused met Velayudham and P. Ws. 2 and S at about 3 p.m. on 13-12-1951 while they were returning from Bodamalai forest collecting fuel and asked Velayudham to accompany them to Ayyampalayam where the first accused resided as he failed to pay the usual monthly mamul of Rs. 2 and a bundle of tuel to accused 1 for two months. P. Ws. 2 and 3 also followed Velayudham and the accused towards Ayyampalayam pleading for the release of Velayudham and promising accused 1 that the mamul would be duly paid shortly. The first accused did not pay any heed to the request of P. Ws. 2 and 3, When the party reached a Palmyra tope, where the pathway branches off to Vadugam Thainaickempatti, P. Ws. 2 and 3 made one more effort and requested the first accused for his release. Accused 1 again refused. Velayudham then advised P. Ws. 2 and 3 to stop pleading with accused 1 and to let accused 1 do anything according to law. Accused 1 got wild and assaulted Velayudham badly. Accused 2 is also stated to have joined accused 1 and both of them gave a. severe beating to Velayudham with sandals and also with hands & legs. It is also stated that accused 1 later picked up a stone and hit the deceased, Velayudham, on his abdomen, chest and other places. Three other persons P. Ws. 4 to 6 are stated to have come there on hearing the noise and their request to the accused not to beat Velayudham was of no avail. Velayudham, the deceased, fell down as a result of the injuries he received. The accused left him there and went away. The witnesses took the deceased to their village walking and supporting, him on their shoulders. Near the village, P. W. 2 brought a coir col and from there they carried the deceased on the cot to his house. Next morning he was taken to a hospital. The Medical Officer at the time Velayudham was brought, did not think that the injuries inflicted on him were serious. Later, finding his condition very grave, the doctor sent for a Magistrate and got a dying declaration recorded from the deceased. This dying declaration is marked as Ex. P. 8 in the case. Subsequently the police examined the deceased and the statement made to the police is marked as Ex. P. 9. The statement to the Magis-trate was made by the deceased about 11-50 a.m., and to the police at about 1 p.m. He died at about 2-15 p. m. on the same day. An inquest was held over trie body of the deceased by the police on the same day between 5 and 7-30 p. m. P. Ws. 2, 3 and 7 were examined at the inquest. The Inspector of Police proceeded to Ayyampalayam on the same night and found the two accused missing from their houses. The first accused surrendered to the police on 17-12-1951. The second accused also surrendered to the police on 16-12-1951. A charge-sheet was laid against the accused for an offence under S. 302, I. P. C.

(3.) The prosecution examined 14 witnesses in this case. P. Ws. 2 to 6 are eyewitnesses. P. W. 7 is the widow of the deceased. She spoke to the fact that when the deceased was brought to his house, he told her that he was beaten by the accused for his failure to pay the money. He did not say how he was beaten by the accused. She gave him fomentation. The next morning he was taken to the hospital as he was suffering from pain.