KAMU ALIAS KAMARAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KAMU @ Kamaraj, the appellant herein, has filed this criminal Appeal challenging his conviction for offence under Section 302 IPC. Originally, the appellant was charged for offence under Sections 302 and 324 IPC. But, he was not found guilty of the offence under Section 324 IPC.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution in brief is as follows:- a) PW-1 Muthu is the uncle of the deceased Vellaithevan, aged about sixteen years. PW-2 is the mother of PW-1. PW-3 is closely related to PW-2. PW-4 is the husband of PW-3. The above four prosecution witnesses and the accused are residing in the same area and doing fish vending business. b) On 22. 02. 1996 at about 6. 00 pm, the deceased came to pw-1 and complained that the accused had beaten him. When PW-1 went to the accused and questioned him, the accused beat PW-1 also. Then PW-1 and the deceased returned home. Immediately thereafter, the accused came to the house of PW-1 and began to stab the deceased above his hip and other parts of his body. PW-2 Muniammal who was standing in Temple along with PW-1, witnessed the occurrence. PW-2 - mother of PW-1, intervened and questioned the accused. The accused stabbed PW-2 also and fled away. The deceased on receipt of the injuries ran up to tea shop and fell down. PW-4-Boominathan, husband of PW-3 came to the scene and took the deceased to Kilpauk Hospital where he was declared dead. c) On 22. 02. 1996, at about 10. 30 p. m. , PW-1 went to police Station and gave complaint [ex. P-1], registered as First Information report [ex. P-6], in Cr. No. 287/1996 for offences under Sections 324 and 302 IPC. d) PW-7 Inspector of Police on receipt of the message, took up investigation and observed all the formalities viz. , preparation of observation Mahazar and Rough Sketch. On the next day, he took sample earth and bloodstained earth under the cover of mahazar. Then on 23. 02. 1996, between 8 a. m. and 11. 00 a. m. , he conducted inquest over the body of the deceased and prepared inquest report-Ex. P. 10. Then he sent the body for postmortem. e) PW-6 Doctor attached to the Kilpauk Medical College hospital, conducted postmortem on the body of the deceased on 23. 02. 1996 at about 1. 15 p. m. and found various abrasions and incised wounds and two stab wounds. Then, he issued the Postmortem Certificate - Ex. P-5, opining that the deceased would appear to have died due to shock and haemorrhage due to stab injuries on the left lung and right femoral artery. f) PW-7 took steps to arrest the accused. In the meantime, on 25. 02. 1996, the accused surrendered before the XVII Metropolitan magistrate, Saidapet and he was sent to police custody. While in police custody, the accused gave voluntary confessional statement to PW-7, the admissible portion of which was marked as Ex. P-2. Pursuant to the voluntary confession, MO-1-knife was recovered from the accused. Then, the material objects collected were sent for Chemical Analysis. g) After completion of the investigation, Charge Sheet was laid against the accused for offences under Section 324 and 302 IPC.

(3.) ON these aspects, we have heard the learned Additional public Prosecutor.