RAMASAMY S/O SUBBIAH THEVAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants, who are accused Nos.1 and 3 in Sessions Case No.166 of 2000 on the file of I-Additional Sessions Judge, Madurai, have filed this appeal challenging the judgment, dated 14.09.2001, convicting them under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentencing each of them to undergo life imprisonment for the said offence. THE appellants and first appellant's wife by name Nagammal (Accused No.2) were tried for an offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. for causing the death of one Subburaj. After trial, the trial court acquitted accused No.2 in the case.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:

(3.) THE occurrence is said to have taken place at 6.00 a.m. on 30.04.1999. At 9.00 a.m. P.W.1 has reached the police station, which is seven kilometre away from the occurrence place and lodged Ex.P-1 complaint. In Ex.P-1 complaint itself P.W.1 has narrated the motive for the accused to attack the deceased and also narrated how the occurrence took place. She has also mentioned the presence of P.W.2, who is none other than the father of the accused No.1. Based on Ex.P-1 complaint, which was received at 9.00 a.m., P.W.9 Sub-Inspector of Police has registered a case for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 302 I.P.C. and prepared Ex.P-9 printed FIR. THE FIR has reached the Judicial magistrate Court, Andipatti, at 12.00 Noon. THE distance between the police station and Andipatti is 20 kilometres as seen from the evidence of P.W.9 Sub-Inspector of Police. Thus, it could be seen that there is no delay either in lodging the complaint by P.W.1 or in the F.I.R. reaching the Court.