THOTHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant in this case has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge of Ramanathapuram division for the murder of his wife, Manmkki at about 7 a. m. on 7-3-1955 in the cart track north of Selliamman Koil oorani in Kallangudi village and sentenced to death.

(2.) THE occurrence is stated to have taken place on the cart track while the said Mannikki was coming, taking water from Selliamman Koiloorani. The appellant married this Mannlkki in or about June 1954. There was great disparity in age between the appellant and his wife, the deceased. The appellant was aged about 40 years while the deceased was only about 16. The mother of the deceased was unwilling to give her daughter in marriage to this appellant but P. W. 8 the paternal uncle of the deceased and two other persons, P, Ws. 9 and 10 who were stated to be the friends of the family were responsible for the marriage of the deceased with the appellant. The mother did not even attend the marriage showing thereby her strong disapproval of it. The appellant had by his first wife two sons one of whom is P. W. 12 in the case. The deceased and the appellant got on well for two or three months. Later the appellant started complaining that the deceased was not sharing bed with him and there is evidence in the case to show that this woman was frequently going to the house of one Manickam who is stated to be a cousin of the appellant. The appellant tried his best to prevent his wife from going to the house of Manickam but he did not succeed. A few days before the occurrence, one night the deceased was sleeping at threshold of the house while the appellant was sleeping in the pial. The appellant heard a noise caused by the beating of the cocoanut leaves with which the deceased was covering herself. The appellant asked her as to what the noise was and she replied that she was driving away mosquitoes. After sometime the appellant asked as to why the dog was barking and to this the deceased did not reply. Next morning the appellant took the deceased to the fields and questioned her about the previous night's incident. No satisfactory reply was forthcoming. After their return from the fields the appellant was sharpening a knife in the presence of the deceased and his son, P. W. 12. When P. W. 12 asked him as to why he was sharpening the knife the appellant replied that he was going to cut a goat. The quarrels between the appellant and his wife were the subject of a panchayat in the village and in spite of the best efforts of the panchayatdars they could not make the appellant and the deceased live together. The deceased became disgusted with her husband and finally she came away to the house of P. W. 8, her paternal uncle, a few days before the occurrence. She told her uncle that it was not possible for her to live with her husband as he was threatening her every now and then and that he was even sharpening a knife in her presence.

(3.) ON the morning of the occurrence the deceased along with P. Ws. 6 and 7 went to the village oorani to fetch water. After taking water they were returning along the cart track. As they were returning they saw P. Ws. 1 and 3 to 5 going towards the oorani for bringing water. P. W. 6 was coming first and behind her was coming P, W. 7 and after her the deceased was coming. When the deceased was coming near a place called Pongal-oven, P. Ws. 6 and 7 saw the appellant coming in front of them. In about a few minutes time they heard the sound of a mud pot falling down and when they turned towards the oorani side they saw the appellant stabbing the deceased with a knife. The other persons, namely, P. Ws. 1 and 3 to 5 who had also gone to the oorani were returning and when they neared the said place, they heard the cries of the deceased and saw the appellant stabbing the deceased and running away into the fields. The deceased had fallen down on the ground and died soon after. P. W. 1 went to P. W. 8 and reported the matter. P. W. ft went to the scene of occurrence and saw the deceased lying dead with her intestines come out. Then P. W. 8 gave a report Ex. P-6 before the village munsif. The village munsif sent his usual reports to the police and the Magistrate. The Sub Inspector, P. W. 17 on receiving the report reached the place of occurrence, held the inquest, and sent the body for post mortem examination. Meanwhile on 8-3-1955 at about 5 P. M. the appellant appeared before the Sub Magistrate with the knife M. O. No. 3 and gave a statement Ex. P-1 and surrendered the knife. P. W. 2 the Sub Magistrate remanded the appellant to custody. A week later, P. W. 2 recorded the appellant's confessional statement under Section 134 Cr. P. C. after observing all the formalities. After further investigation the appellant was charge-sheeted for the offence of murdering his wife. There can be no doubt that on both the occasions the appellant made voluntary statements before the Sub Magistrate. The statement of the appellant under Section 164, Cr, P. C. is Ex. F-4 in the case. In this statement the appellant merely stated that what he had stated before the Sub Magistrate on an earlier occasion was true. He stated that he was adopting what he had stated on an earlier occasion and that he was not going to say anything new or modify it. He stated that his wife was misbehaving and that in spite of ten panchayats the deceased was not conducting herself properly and that her behaviour led to his stabbing her. In the committal Court also he admitted having stabbed his wife and he stuck to that statement in the Sessions Court but he elaborated it a little further by stating that on the night preceding the occurrence he saw his wife and Manickam lying together in the house of P. W. 8 and unable to bear that sight, next morning he stabbed her near the oorani. A suggestion was made to P. W. 8 whether Manickam was sleeping in his house on the night prior to the occurrence but he denied it. We are, therefore, left only with the sole statement of the appellant in the Sessions Court that] he saw Manickam and his wife, the deceased, sleeping together in the house of P. W. 8. But this statement was not made in any of the earlier statements before the Sub Magistrate, either in Ex. P-1 or P-4 or before the committal Court and it was made for the first time before the Sessions Court. We, therefore, think that the statement of the appellant that he saw his wife and Manickam sleeping together in the house of P. W. 8 on the night previous to the occurrence is an afterthought and not true. But the fact remains that this unfortunate young girl who was married to an old man of forty, did not like him and transferred her affections to another though he is stated to be older than her husband. The evidence shows that the appellant was complaining that his wife was on terms of illicit intimacy with his cousin Manickam. He had, therefore, on that account a strong motive to do away with her. On the evidence furnished by P. Ws. 1 and 3 to 7 and the confessions made by the appellant both in the committing Magistrate's court and in the Sessions Court there can be no doubt that it was the appellant who stabbed the deceased as a result of which she died. The medical evidence shows that there were four incised wounds some of which punctured the lungs and the small intestines. It is, therefore, a clear case of murder. On the evidence it is proved beyond doubt that it was the appellant who committed the murder of his wife.