SAMPATH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are A1 and A2. A1- Sampath has been convicted for the offence under Sections 341 and 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo one month SI for the offence under Section 341 I.P.C. and life imprisonment for the offence under Sections 302 and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo six months RI and A2-Selvam has been convicted for the offence under Sections 341 and 302 read with 109 IPC and sentenced to undergo one month SI for the offence under Section 341 IPC and life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 read with 109 IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo RI for six months and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Challenging the same, A1- Sampath has filed Crl. Appeal No.1155/2003 and A2-Selvam has filed Crl. Appeal No.1063/2004.

(2.) THE facts leading to the conviction are as follows:- a) P.W.1 Kala is the wife of the deceased Karunakaran. P.W.2 Marimuthu is the deceased sister's husband. P.W.3 Sampath is the younger brother of P.W.2. A1 and A2 are close associates. THEy are also residing in the same village in which the prosecution witnesses reside. b) On 4.9.1998 at about 7. 00 p.m., the deceased Karunakaran was standing in front of his house and shouting some persons rearing pigs have caused damage to the surroundings of his house and as such, they are not properly controlling the pigs. Taking that those words were uttered towards A1 and A2- Sampath and Selvam asked the deceased as to why he is scolding them. Due to this, a wordy quarrel arose between the deceased and A1 and A2. A1 and A2 left the scene place immediately stating that they would report this mater to the leader of village P.W.4. Accordingly, they reported the matter to P.W.4. Half an hour later, A1 and A2 came back to the scene place. At that time, the deceased after attending the nature's call was coming back to his house. Both A1 and A2 wrongfully restrained the deceased. A1 took out a knife concealed in his hip and gave a stab on the right shoulder of the deceased. A2 Selvam instigated A1 asking him to attack the deceased. P.W.1 Kala, the wife of the deceased witnessed the occurrence. She raised a alarm. c) On hearing the alarm, P.W.2 Marimuthu and P.W.3 Sampath brother-in-laws of the deceased came to the scene place. Both A1 and A2 ran away from the scene. P.W.1, the wife of the deceased came near the deceased and found her husband dead. THEn, P.Ws. 1 and 4 went to the police station and gave Ex.P.1 complaint to P.W.15, the Inspector of Police. A case was registered for the offence under Section 302 IPC against both the accused in Crime No.537/1998. P.W.15, the Inspector of Police went the scene of occurrence at 3.00 a.m. on 5.9.1998. He prepared the observation mahazar Ex.P.2, drew the rough sketch Ex.P.9 and conducted inquest on the body of the deceased and examined witnesses. THEn, he sent the body for postmortem examination. d) P.W.14, the Doctor conducted postmortem examination on the body of the deceased on 5.9.1998. Ex.P.6 is the postmortem certificate. She opined that the deceased would appear to have died of shock and haemorrhage due to stab injury on the chest, which is vital. e) On 6.9.1998, P.W.15 arrested both A1 and A2 and on their confession, M.O.7 knife was recovered. He sent the material objects for chemical examination. P.W.15, after completing the investigation, laid the charge sheet against both the accused for the offences under Sections 302 read with 109 and 34 IPC. f) During the course of trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 15, filed Exhibits P.1 to P.17 and marked M.Os.1 to 7 before the trial Court. g) When the accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating materials, they denied their complicity in the crime. On the side of defence, none were examined and no exhibits were marked. h) THE trial Court, having regard to the circumstances available on record, concluded that the prosecution has established its case beyond reasonable doubt and convicted and sentenced the accused as stated above. This is the subject matter of challenge in these appeals before this Court filed by the appellants.

(3.) WE have considered the above submissions and perused the entire records.