N.KANNAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the accused 1 and 2 in S.C.No.72 of 2014 on the file of Sessions Court, Magalir Neethimandram, Tiruvarur. They stood charged for the offences under Ss. 120-B, 394, 394 read with 109, 449, 341, 392, 302, 302 read with 109, 307 and 307 read with 34 IPC. By judgment, dtd. 31/8/2015, the trial Court convicted both the accused and sentenced them as detailed below : Accused Sec. of law Sentence A.1 449 I.P.C. Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000.00; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. A.1 302 I.P.C. Life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000.00; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. A.2 341 I.P.C. Fine of Rs.100.00; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one week. A.2 449 I.P.C. Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay of Rs.1,000.00; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. A.2 302 r/w. 109 I.P.C. Life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000.00; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. A.2 307 I.P.C. Rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay of Rs.1,000.00; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants are before this Court with this appeal.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows :

(3.) Based on the above materials, the trial Court framed charges against the accused as detailed in the first paragraph of the judgment and the accused denied the same. In order to prove the case, on the side of prosecution, as many as 18 witnesses were examined, 18 documents and 19 material objects were marked. Out of the said witnesses, P.W.1 has stated that he was residing in the eastern portion of the house belonging to the deceased, as a tenant. He has stated about the entire occurrence. He has further stated about the complaint made by him to the police. He has identified M.Os.1 and 2, as the knives used by the accused in the occurrence. P.W.2 Mrs.Revathi is a neighbour of the deceased. According to her, around 11.00 a.m. on 21/10/2013, she heard an alarm raised from the house of the deceased and when she rushed to the house of the deceased, she found one person (male) cutting the deceased and another person (male) cutting P.W.1. She has further stated that both the assailants ran away from the scene of occurrence. She has not identified the accused in Court. P.W.3 is yet another neighbour of the deceased. She has stated that by about 11.00 a.m. on 21/10/2013, on hearing an alarm raised from the house of the deceased, when she went to the house of the deceased, she found one person cutting the deceased with a knife and the other one cutting P.W.1 with another knife and, on seeing her, both the assailants ran away from the place of occurrence. She has also not identified the accused, as the assailants. P.W.4 is the daughter of the deceased. During the relevant time, she was residing in Chennai. On 21/10/2013, according to her, around 11.00 a.m., P.W.2 informed her over phone about the occurrence. Immediately, she rushed to Mannargudi to the house of the deceased. She reached the house between 06.30 p.m. and 07.30 p.m. At that time, she found a gold chain, worn by the deceased, missing. She has identified M.Os.3 and 4 as the two pieces of one single chain, worn by the deceased. P.W.5 has stated that he went to the place of occurrence, on hearing about the occurrence, later on. P.W.6 is a resident of Mannargudi. According to him, he was doing renovation works in the building, as a business, and the deceased used to call him as and when there had arisen necessity. He has further stated that 15 days prior to the date of death of the deceased, the deceased had requested him to do some repair work at her house. He had sent the first accused for the work at the house of the deceased. The first accused went there only for one day and, thereafter, he did not go. He also did not turn up for work thereafter. P.W.7 has stated that on 21/10/2013, at 11.00 a.m., on hearing the alarm raised from the house of the deceased, when he went to the house of the deceased, he found two persons fleeing away from the scene of occurrence. He has not identified the accused as those two persons. P.W.8 has turned hostile and he has not supported the case of the prosecution in any manner. P.W.9 has stated about the arrest of the second accused at Tanjore Medical College Hospital and the consequential recovery of a gold chain and a T.Shirt from him. P.W.10 has stated about the disclosure statement made by the first accused on 31/10/2013 while in police custody and the consequential recovery of pieces of the gold chain and other material objects. P.W.11 has spoken about the preparation of the observation mahazar and rough sketch and the recovery of material objects from the place of occurrence, including bloodstained earth and sample earth. P.W.12 is the brother's daughter of P.W.1. She has also stated about the entire occurrence. P.W.13 Dr.Govindaraj, has spoken about the treatment given to P.W.1 at 12.30 p.m. on 21/10/2013 at the Government Hospital, Mannargudi. P.W.14, a Head Constable, has stated that he handed over the F.I.R. and the complaint to the learned Judicial Magistrate at 08.40 p.m. on the same day. He has stated that they were handed over to him by the S.I. of Police, P.W.17, only at 06.00 p.m. P.W.15 has stated that he took the dead body from the place of occurrence and handed over the same to the doctor, for post-mortem. P.W.16 has spoken about the post-mortem conducted and his final opinion, regarding the cause of death. P.W.17 has spoken about the registration of the case on the complaint of P.W.1. P.W.18, Inspector of Police, has spoken about the investigation done and the final report filed.