ALAGARSAMY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is against the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ramnad at Mudurai in C.A. No. 147/88 confirming the order of conviction passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Sivaganga, in SC No. 96/82 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year, four years, and Rs. 1,500 (except for first accused) and one month respectively for the offences under Ss. 148, 326 and 326 read with S. 149, IPC. For the offence under S. 147, IPC also against some of the accused, one year rigorous imprisonment is imposed. The first accused has been convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 for the offence under S. 326, IPC. Even though the second accused was convicted under S. 326, IPC for three counts, the learned Sessions Judge convicted him only for two counts.

(2.) P.W. 1, is a resident in Madhavarayanpatti Village whereas the accused are the residents of Iyyapatti the adjacent Village. There was previous enmity between P.W. 1 and the accused. On 16-1-81, there was festival in the adjacent Village Siravayal where bulls were let out in connection with the Pongal festival. P.W. 1 and his son P.W. 2 also had been to Siravayal to see the bull-fight. The fourth accused, son of the first accused, also was found in the group, P.W. 2 asked him as to how he could tether his cattle in their cattle-shed for which the fourth accused replied that he did not tether his cattle. Immediately P.W. 1 told his son not to speak anything to him and it could be talked to his father. On the next day morning, by about 7-30 a.m. all the accused and others armed with deadly weapons like velstick, katthi, Kambu, sticks, aruval etc. came shouting, 'stab them and kill them' and all of them surrounding the house of P.W. 1 damaged the tiles with the sticks. P.W. 1's wife P.W. 4 coming out of the house, begged the first accused not to damage the house and everything could be talked in Panchayat. But the first accused first revision petitioner directed others to cut her. Immediately, the second accused cut her with aruval and the 5th and the 11th accused beat her on her right hand and the 10th accused beat her in the hip. P.W. 5 the daughter of P.W. 4, came out imporing the accused persons not to beat her mother. The first accused shouted that in spite of beating the womenfolk, coward males did not come out and directed to beat P.W. 5 also. Immediately, the second accused cut on her head and the fifth accused beat her on her right hand with strick. The accused 2 and 3 and the 9th accused snatched her jewels. Seeing this attack on the mother and sister, P.W. 2 came out of the house. Immediately, the Seventh accused/sixth revision petitioner cut him on his neck. The second revision petitioner cut him on his right hand and the first and ninth revision petitioners also cut him on the left hand and left leg. Seeing this development, P.W. 1 and his other son P.W. 3 also came out of the house. The first accused cut P.W. 3 on the left leg below the knee and the accused 14, 17, 24 and 25, while holding legs of P.W. 3 the sixth accused/fifth revision petitioner cut him on his backside of the neck. The Second accused and the 20th accused/12th revision petitioner cut P.W. 1 on the head and right hand while sixth accused, seventh accused, first accused and ninth accused cut him on his leg and head with aruvals. As the persons from the neighbouring places came there, these revision petitioners and others left the scene of occurrence. The neighbours who came there took the injured persons namely P.Ws. 1 to 5 to Thirupathur Hospital in a bullock-cart where P.W. 8 gave the treatment. As the injuries on P.Ws. 2 and 3 were serious in nature, all these injured persons were taken to Madurai where they were admitted in Rajaji Government Hospital for intensive treatment. The left leg below the knee of P.W. 3 was completely amputated. From the message received from the hospital, P.W. 12 the Inspector of Police, deputed P.W. 11 to record the statement of P.W. 1 in the hospital and P.W. 12 took up the investigation.

(3.) On the side of the accused, the third accused was examined as D.W. 1 and the Court below, having considered the evidence on record has found the revision petitioners guilty of the offences mentioned above.