SAMSUDEEN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole appellant who stood charged, tried and found guilty by the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Chingleput and awarded life imprisonment for an offence under section 302 IPC and one year rigorous imprisonment for an offence under section 324 IP C , has brought forth this appeal.

(2.) THE short facts that are necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated thus: - (a) P. W. 1 is the wife of the deceased. P. W. 1 was living with her husband, Manokaran , the deceased, as a tenant in the house of P. W. 9. P. W. 9 is the elder sister of the accused. She was an illiterate and the deceased used to help her for writing letters. 40 days prior to the date of occurrence, the accused came and stayed with her sister. Just 20 days prior to the occurrence, he took all the jewels of the daughter of p. W. 9 and all the letters written by her husband. P. W. 9 was under the impression that the accused gone to his native place Kurumbu r. She went over there and brought him back. From the time of his return, there was a continuous quarrel between the accused and his sister, P. W. 9, as to the return of the jewels. On the previous day of the occurrence, i. e. on 17. 2. 1994, there was a heated exchange between P. W. 9 and her brother, the accused. As usual, the deceased went over there and tried to pacify the situation. THE deceased uttered "not to quarrel with a lady, and if he was brave, he can face him. " P. W. 9 asked the accused to go out. THE accused became enraged over the same. On 18. 2. 1994, P. W. 1 came back from her work and at about 9. 30 p. m. the deceased went to upstairs to take out dried clothes. P. W. 1 also followed her husband. Both of them did not know the fact that the accused was present in the upstairs. THEre was again a quarrel. At that time, the deceased asked the accused to return the jewels to his sister and asked why he was quarreling with her. On hearing the same, the accused uttered a few words and the deceased caught the shirt of the accused. On being enraged over the same, the accused provoked, got down, took a knife, came back and stabbed the deceased. When p. W. 1 interfered, she was also attacked. THE accused gave two stabs on the chest and on the flank of the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased fell down. P. W. 1 also sustained injuries. THE accused immediately fled away from the place of occurrence. P. W. 1 and the deceased were taken to a private nursing home called JJ Hospital, where, P. W. 3 the Doctor was present. At that time since it was a medico-legal case, the Doctor informed them to go to Kilpauk Medical College Hospital for further treatment. P. W. 4, the Medical Officer, was present at Kilpauk Medical College Hospital and he treated p. W. 1. Ex. P2 is the accident register in respect of P. W. 1. He also examined the deceased and declared him dead. Ex. P3 is the death intimation, which was given to Avadi Police Station. (b) P. W. 16, Sub Inspector of Police, Avadi Police Station, on receipt of death intimation, reached Kilpauk Medical College Hospital, where he recorded the statement of P. W. 1 under Ex. P1, on the strength of which, he registered a case in Crime No. 394/1994 for the offences under sections 302 and 324 IPC. Ex. P24, the printed First Information Report, was despatched to the Court. On receipt of the same, P. W. 17, Inspector of Police, took up investigation, proceeded to the scene of occurrence, made an inspection in the presence of two witnesses and prepared an observation mahazar , ex. P9 and a rough sketch, Ex. P25. Material Objects were also recovered from the scene of occurrence under a mahazar. He conducted inquest on the dead body of the deceased in the presence of witnesses and panchayathars and prepared Ex. P26, the inquest report. Following the same, the dead body of Manokaran , was sent to the Kilpauk Medical College Hospital, with a requisition Ex. P5 for conducting autopsy. (c) P. W. 5, the Professor and Head of the Department, forensic Medicine, Kilpauk Medical College, Madras, on receipt of the requisition, conducted autopsy on the dead body of Manokaran and found the following injuries: - 1. Incised wounds on (a) back of left elbow 4 x 2 cm x skin deep. (b) Over the back of left upper arm 4 x 2 cm x skin deep. (c) On the middle of left thigh on the outer aspect 3 x 1. 5 cm x skin deep. 2. An obliquely placed stab wound 3 x 2 cms on the front of left side of chest along the anterior axillary line and the upper end is 26 cms below the outer end of the left collar bone and the lower end is 14 cms away from the midline. THE Doctor has issued a postmortem certificate Ex. P6 and has opined that the deceased would appear to have died of shock and haemorrhage due to stab injury to the heart and left lung. (d) During the course of investigation, the Investigating officer arrested the accused on 1. 3. 1994 and he gave a confessional statement, which was recorded by him in the presence of two witnesses and the admissible part is marked as Ex. P28. Following the same, M. Os. 22 and 23 were seized undera mahazar , Ex. P27. THE accused was remanded to judicial custody. THE statements of the accused and P. Ws. 1, 2 and 9 and one Aru l were recorded by the Court, on a requisition given by him, and the jewels belonging to P. W. 9 were recovered pending investigation, from P. W. 12 and they were also sent to Court. Following the same, a requisition was forwarded to the concerned Court for sending all the material objects for chemical analysis. Accordingly, they were subjected to chemical analysis and reports were received by the concerned Court. On completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer filed the final report before the Committal Court .

(3.) THE Court heard the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) on the above contentions.