LAWS(MAD)-1996-3-108

RAJAMANI NADAR Vs. STATE

Decided On March 27, 1996
RAJAMANI NADAR Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was accused in Sessions Case No. 189 of 1987 on the file of the Court of the Session, Tirunelveli Division, Tirunelveli. On trial he was found guilty under Section 302 I.P.C., convicted thereunder and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the present action has been resorted to.

(3.) Brief facts are :(a) The scene Village Paulnagar, a segment of V. M. Chatram, is situate within the jurisdictional limits of Tirunelveli Taluk Police Station, 5 Kms. South- East. The accused is a resident of Paulnagar. His wife is P. W. 1. The spouses were blessed with three male off-springs. Their eldest son is by name Davidoss. One Jebamani Christopher (since deceased) is their second son. P.W. 3. Jayakumar is their third son. The first son Davidoss is married to P.W. 2. Gnanam. He is blessed with two children. All of them lived together in two portions of the house, one on the south and the other on the north, situate adjacent to each other, as members of the joint family. (b) The accused was more or less leading a vagabond life. He did not evince any interest in the welfare of the family members. He did not engage himself in any sort of avocation to support the family members. Though he was not earning anything, his wants rather appeared to be manifold and he was very often pestering the members of the family for payment of adequate amount to meet out his demands. His demands came very often. Therefore, it appears there were frequent skirmishes and quarrels between himself and the members of the family.(c) The deceased and the eldest son Davidoss, it is said, had been transacting business in grocery. The grocery shop, it is said is situate one mile away from Paulnagar, where the members of the family had been residing. From the income the two sons got from the grocery business, the entire family members, including the accused, were eking out their livelihood.(d) The accused, it appears, somehow or the other developed the habit of addiction to liquor and he was very often found in an inebriated mood. On the day of occurrence, that is, on 23-12-1986. at or about 6.30 p.m. the accused, as usual came to the house in an inebriated mood. In such a mood he was quarrelling with his wife, P.W. 1. At that time the deceased was present in the house. He questioned the propriety of the accused, his father, in quarrelling with the mother P.W. 1. The egoistic father-accused took it as an affront andinsult to himself and entered into a wordy quarrel or duel with his son, the victim-deceased. The wordy altercation or duel somehow or the other developed into a mutual fight with each other, in the sense of each beating the other. In the process of such quarrel and mutual fight, the enraged father-accused went to the southern portion of the house and returned with M.O. 1 knife. The accused did in fact make an attempt to stab the deceased, his son. P. W. I wife of the accused somehow or the other made an attempt to ward off such an attack. Her efforts proved futile. The accused with the aid of his left hand pushed aside his wife P.W. 1 and attempted to stab on the deceased, his son. The stab so attempted to be inflicted on the person of the deceased was stated to have landed on his left chest. The accused, no sooner than he did inflict a stab, ran away from the scene without inflicting any further stab.(e) On receipt of the stab, the victim deceased fell down and profuse bleeding oozed out of the wound. P. W. 1 seeing the blood gushing from the wound, took steps to arrest the bleeding. She was stated to have bandaged the wound with torn pieces of cloth. This occurrence was stated to have happened, when all the family members were available in the house. P.W. 2, the daughter-in-law of the accused and P.W. 3 his other son, studying in a Polytechnic, were present in the house. P. W. 3, in an attempt to save his brother, the victim deceased, ran out and hired a taxi for the victim-deceased being taken to the hospital. The victim-deceased was put into the taxi brought by P. W. 3 and while he was being transported to the hospital, he breathed his last on the wheels. Any how, the victim-deceased had been taken to the Tirunelveli Medical College Hospital with the fond hope to save the life of the victim-deceased, if there is any lingering life in him.(f) P. W. 10, was the then Assistant Professor in Paediatrics attached to Tirunelveli Medical College Hospital. At or about 7.15 p.m. while he was in charge of the Casualty Department, the victim-deceased had been brought to the casualty department by P.W. 1, P. W. 10, on examining the victim-deceased, found him to be dead. Consequently, he sent Ex. P. 12, death intimation to the outpost police station situate inside the hospital. He then kept the corpse of the deceased in the mortuary.(g) P. W. 7 was the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Tirunelveli Taluk Police Station. At 8.00 P.M. while he was in charge of the station, he received a telephone message from the outpost police station situate inside the Tiruneveli Medical College Hospital regarding the occurrence, besides the receipt of Ex.P.12, death accident intimation. At 2.30 a.m. he reached the hospital and from P.W. 1, who was there, he recorded a statement as per her narration. After reading the same to her and the same being admitted by her to be correct, he got her signature in it. Her eldest son Davidoss attested the said statement. Ex. P. 1 is the statement.(h) He returned to the police station at 9.00 p.m. along with Ex.P.1 and on the strength of Ex. P. 1 he registered the case in Crime No. 498/86, for an alleged offence under S. 302, I.P.C. Ex.P. 13, is the printed F.I.R. He despatched Ex. P. 1 and Ex.P. 13 and express reports to the officers concerned through the Constable P. W. 8. Ex. P. 14 is the passport given to P.W. 8.(i) P. W. 11, the then Inspector of Police, Perumalpuram Circle, in charge of Tirunelveli Circle, on receipt of the information respecting the occurrence over telephone at 9.30 p.m. He rushed to Tirunelveli Taluk P. S. He secured a copy of the express report there and took further investigation of the case. He immediately rushed to Daulnagar at 10.30 p.m. and inspected the scene in the presence of P.W. 5 the Village Administrative Officer and his Thalayari Sankarapandian and prepared Ex.P .4. Observation Mahazar. He drew a rough sketch of the scene of occurrence (Ex. P. 15). He did not further proceed with the investigation. At 5.30 a.m. on the next day i.e., 24-12-1986 he seized from P.W. 1 who was in the hospital, blood-stained saree (M.O. 2) besides the blood-stained torn pieces of cloth (M.Os. 3 and 4) stated to have been used for bandaging the wound of victim-deceased under Ex.P.5. Ex.P.4 and Ex.P.5 were attested by P.W.5. Between 6.00 a.m. and 6.00 a.m. he conducted an inquest over the body of the deceased in the mortuary of the hospital. Ex.P. 16 is the inquest report. During inquest he examined P.Ws. 1 to 3. After inquest, he despatched the body of the deceased through Constable P.W. 9. along with requisition Ex.P. 2. for the purpose of autopsy. He also examined P.W. 5 and others.(j) P.W. 4 was the then Tutor in Forensic Medicine attached to Tirunelveli Medical College Hospital. On receipt of Ex.P.2. requisition, he commenced the autopsy at 12.30 p.m. Ex.P.3 is the post-mortem certificate, he issued. He would opine that the injury described in Ex.P.2. could have been caused by a weapon like M.O. 1 . He further opined that the said injury was necessarily fatal and the victim - deceased, after the receipt of the injury, could have been alive for half-an hour.(k) After the autopsy was over, the Constable P.W. 9, seized from the body blood-stained lungi (M.O. 5), blood-stained green colour banian (M.O.6) blood-stained half-sleeve shirt (M.O. 7), Men's brief Jatti (M.O. 8) and waist - chord (M.O. 10) and all these seized material objects had been handed over to the police station.l. P. W. 12 was the then Inspector of Police, Tirunelveli Taluk Police Station. He returned from leave on 24- 12-1986 and took up further investigation in the case from P.W. 11. He verified the investigation done by P.W. 11. At 4.00 p.m. he arrested the accused at Tirunelveli Tiruchendur Road adjacent to a silk-worm farm in the presence of P.W. 5 and his menial Sankarapandian. On interrogation, the accused was stated to have given a voluntary confession under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Ex.P.6 is the admissible portion of the confession statement. P.W. 11 was also stated to have been present at the time when P.W. 12 secured the arrest of the accused and his giving the confession statement under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Pursuant to Ex.P.6, confession statement, the accused took P.W. 12, P. W.5 and others to the east of silk-worm farm and about 150 feet away on the north of the farm and took out and produced M.O. 1. knife from the place where M.O. 8 torn cloth was found lying. He seized M.O. 1 and M.O. 8 under Ex.P. 7, Ex.P.6 and Ex.P.7 were attested by P.W. 5 and another. He examined P.W. 5. He returned to the Police Station along with the accused and the seized articles. He sent the accused to Court for remand on the next day. On 30-12-1986 he examined P.W. 4. P.W. 9 and others. On 12-1-1987 he examined P.W. 8. On the same day, he also sent Ex.P.8 requisition to Judicial Magistrate II, Tirunelveli for sending the incriminating material objects to the Chemical Examiner for the purpose of chemical analysis.(m) P, W. 6 was the then Head Clerk attached to Judicial Second Class Magistrate Court No. II, Tirunelveli. On receipt of Ex.P.8 requisition. he separately packed the material objects, sealed and sent the same, pursuant to the directions of learned Magistrate to the Chemical Examiner for the purpose of chemical analysis under Ex.P. 9, Ex.P. 10 and Ex.P. 11 are the reports of the Chemical Examiner and Serologist respectively.(n) After completing the formalities of investigation, P. W. 12 laid a final report under Section 173(2) Crl. P.C. against the accused for an alleged offence under Section 302, I.P.C. before the Judicial Second Class Magistrate II, Tirunelveli on 31-3-1987.