JOTHIMUTHU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants five in number have challenged the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Kamarajar District, Srivilliputhur made in S.C.No.1 o 1995 whereby they stood charged, tried and convicted as follows: First Charge: A1 to A5 convicted for the offence under section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.200/- in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. Second Charge: A1 to A3 were convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. Third Charge: A4 and A5 were convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC read with 149 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. Fourth charge: A3 to A5 were convicted for the offence under Section 326 IPC and sentenced to undergo 5 years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo 6 months RI. Fifth Charge: A1 and A2 were convicted for the offence under Section 326 and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment along with Rs.500/- fine and in default to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. Sixth Charge: A5 was convicted for the offence under section 324 IPC and sentenced to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. Seventh Charge: A1 to A4 were convicted for the offence under Section 324 read with 149 IPC and sentenced to undergo 1 year rigorous Imprisonment along with fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) THE short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated thus: P.W.1 to 4 and the deceased were the residents of Seelampatti village. P.W.1 is the elder brother of the deceased, while PW2 is the wife of the deceased. Accused 1 and 5 are brothers. A3 and A4 are father and son. A2 is cousin of A1 and A5 and brother's son of A4. THEre are two groups in the village, one headed by one Samuel, the father of first and fifth accused and the other group was headed by one Paranjothi. Originally, the said Paranjothi was collecting the subscription from all his community people in the village for their welfare. THE same was entrusted with the said Samuel for another period. THE said Samuel made some misappropriation and therefore a section of the group refused to give subscription and thus the villagers were divided into two groups. One Anburaj, (brother of A2 -Daniel) married a girl by name Yesammal who is closely related to PW2. THEy were living at Madras and due to some misunderstanding between the couple, suspecting the the fidelity of the said Yesammal, the said Anburaj returned to his village Seelampatti. THE deceased went to Madras and brought Yesammal to the village for the purpose of settlement of dispute between the husband and wife and they began to live peacefully. This was not liked by the accused party. On the next day, when P.Ws.2 and 4 were chatting, the second accused, who is the brother of Anburaj, abused P.W.2 with filthy language for uniting the Yesammal with his brother since the said Yesammal is of bad character. P.W.2 in turn informed the incident to her husband who pacified her to be calm.. On the next day, P.W.1 the elder brother of the deceased Dharmaraj, who was employed Tuticorin came to village for the purpose of obtaining a school certificate of his son. At that time, P.W.2 told him about the conduct of the second accused in abusing her with filthy language. On 29.12.1996, at about 9 a.m. P.W.1 accompanied by P.W.2 and the deceased Anburaj were proceeding in the street to question the second accused about his conduct. When they were in front of the house of one Pandi, fourth accused came in a opposite direction. P.W.1 told fourth accused about the conduct of the second accused in scolding his sister in law with abusive words. THEre was wordy exchange between them and fourth accused who went to his house came along with another accused armed with aruval, velstick and knife stick. Accused 3 to 5 attacked PW1. When PW2 intervened A5 attacked her with knife stick. THE deceased fell down with injuries and all the accused fled away from the scene of occurrence. THE deceased was taken to his house by P.W.1 and in front of his house, he succumbed to the injuries.

(3.) AN abrasion 5cmx1/2cm in the inner aspect of the right elbow. The doctor has issued Ex.P.6 postmortem certificate, wherein he has opined that the deceased would appear to have died of the injuries to the brain and intraranial haemorrhage about 20 to 24 hours prior to autopsy. 5. Pending investigation, all the accused were surrendered before the Court on 2.1.1987. On requisition, they were sent for police custody on 15.1.1987. The first accused volunteered to give a confessional statement in the presence of two witnesses and the same was recorded by the investigator, the admissible part of which was marked as Ex.P.13. Pursuant to the confessional statement, all the M.Os were recovered in the presence of witnesses and they were sent to Court. The accused were also sent to Judicial remand. All the Mos. recovered from the place of occurrence and from the dead body were subjected to chemical analysis by the Forensic department. On analysis, Ex.P.20 the Chemical ANalyst's report and Ex.P.21 is the Serologist's report were received by the Court. On completion of investigation, the final report was filed by the investigating officer before the committal Court.