MALLAPPA ALIAS MALLESAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused, who was convicted for an offence under Section 302 IPC, is the appellant before this Court. THE accused was convicted for the aforesaid offence and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- with default sentence.

(2.) THE charge as against the accused is that on 08.02.2000 at about 8.30 pm at Sundatty to Abery pathway, the accused, who was piqued over the persistent demand made by Chinnanna to return a sum of Rs.1 lakh received by way of hand loan, attacked him with an intention to cause his death with bill hook and caused his instantaneous death and thereby, he committed an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) IT is a case where the prosecution has come out with ocular testimony through P.Ws.3 and 4. P.W.4 is the daughter of the deceased and P.W.3 is the husband of P.W.4. Pappammal-P.W.6 has spoken to the fact that the deceased came to her shop at 7.00 pm and sought for beedi and match boxes. IT is her categorical version that she informed him that no stock of those articles were available in her shop. Of course at one stage during the course of cross examination she would state that she closed her shop at 10.00 am itself as sufficient stock was not available in her shop. Again she reverted to her original stand that the deceased approached her at 7.00 pm on the fateful day and sought for beedi and match boxes. The fact remains the small shop of Pappammal-P.W.6 was located in her very house. In villages even if the shop is closed, when the shop is annexed along with the house, the villagers used to go and ask for some articles. IT is not the version of Pappammal that the deceased had not approached seeking those articles. Therefore, in the above circumstances, even if the shop of Papammal had been closed at 10.00 am in the morning, we cannot rule out the possibility of Chinnnanna approaching her seeking those articles.