KANNAN ALIAS RENGANATHAN Vs. STATE OF PONDICHERRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant herein stands convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pondicherry at Karaikal, for the offence under Sec. 304, Indian Penal Code, even without mentioning the part under which he is guilty, and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years, for having murdered one Rajendran on 16.1.1987 at 09.00 p.m. in Vizhithiyur Village within Niravi Police limits of Pondicherry.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are as follows: The appellant and the deceased Rajendran are natives of Vizhithiyur. P.W.1 is the father of the deceased Rajendran and P.Ws.2 and 3 are his brothers. The accused 2 and 3, who have been acquitted by the Lower Court are the brothers of the appellant. The deceased was eking out his livelihood as a tailor. The appellant herein gave message to police about one Mathialagan, brother of the deceased, for his participation in gambling in Aghalam. As this appellant was an informant to the police about that matter, the deceased, on 16.1.1987 at about 8.30 p.m., went to the house of the appellant and quarrelled with him for giving the information to the police about his brother. In the wordy quarrel between them, the deceased Rajendran was beaten by first accused. The deceased immediately came to his brother P.W.2 informing that he was beaten by the first accused. Immediately P.W.2 went to the first accused and when he was questioning him, the other brother of the deceased P.W.3 Marimuthu also came there and there was altercation between the first accused on one side and P.W.2, P.W.3 and the deceased on the other side. The first accused -s brothers, accused 2 and 3, also joined the first accused and the first accused ran into the house and brought M.O.1 aruval and cut the deceased Rajendran on his abdomen, hip and back. The deceased receiving the injuries, ran towards the south of the Subsidiary Health Centre but he fell in the road itself in front of the Health Centre. His brothers 2 and 3 covered the wounds with M.O.2 bedsheet. After inflicting the injuries on the deceased the first accused and his brothers ran away. P.W.1, the father of the deceased, who was standing at some distance talking with one Pakkiri Naidu, heard the voice of his son, and therefore, he witnessed the occurrence when his son was cut P.W.4, who was no his way to the tailor shop, and P.W.5, who is having his tea shop nearby, also had witnessed this occurrence. P.W.6, while going for shopping, saw the appellant with aruval in his hand when the deceased was running to the health centre on the southern side. P.W.7 also saw the deceased with cut injuries in front of the health centre. P.Ws.2 and 3 took the deceased to P.W.8, the Medical Officer attached to the Vizhithiyur Hospital, and they instructed their brother P.W. 1 to go to the police station and lodge a complaint. P.W.8, the Medical Officer, after examining the deceased found that the injuries were serious in nature and therefore, he directed P.Ws.2 and 3 to take their brother to General Hospital, Karaikal. P.W.9, the employer of P.W.2, took the deceased in his car to Karaikal. Within a few minutes, the second accused also came to P.W.8 with head injuries accompanied by his brother, third accused, and P.W.8 is directed the second accused also to go to Karaikal for treatment. In the meanwhile, P.W. 1 went to Niravi Police Station at about 23.15 hours and lodged the complaint Ex.P -1 to the Sub Inspector of police P.W.19. P.w.19 registered the complaint in Crime No.2 of 1987 under Secs.342 and 307 read with Sec.34, Indian Penal Code. Ex.P -7 is the First Information Report. P.W.19, in the midnight, came to the scene of occurrence and prepared the observation mahazar Ex.P -3 and seized the bloodstained earth M.O.4 in the presence of P.W.11. The deceased, who was taken to General Hospital, Karaikal, in the car, was examined by P.W.16, the Medical Officer, and he found the following injuries on the body of Rajendran.

(3.) AT the outset, I have to express my shock and anguish over the manner in which the charges have been framed in this case. The State has filed the chargesheet for the offence under Sec.302, Indian Penal Code read with Sec.34, Indian Penal Code against all the three accused because the prosecution case is that the deceased was murdered by cutting with M.O.1 aruval by the appellant herein with the assistance of his brothers accused 2 and 3, while they were holding the deceased by shoulders, to enable the appellant to cut them. The eye -witnesses also have narrated the overt act against all the accused and the manner of their participation in the crime. When such is the statement of the witnesses, it is rather strange for me to see that the Additional Sessions Judge, Karaikal, has framed the charge against the first accused (appellant herein) only for the offence under Sec.304, Indian Penal Code, that too even without specifying the part under which the accused was liable to be punished. Still worse is the charges against appellants 2 and 3 framed only , for the offence under Sec.323, Indian Penal Code though the statements of the witnesses is to the effect that they actively assisted the first accused in murdering the deceased by holding the deceased person. It appears that the Additional Sessions Judge, Karaikal, did not know the scope of Sec.304, Indian Penal Code, which has two parts, and when once the offence is brought under Sec.304, Indian Penal Code, it should fall either under Sec.304, Part I or Part II. The Additional Sessions Judge, Karaikal, did not know even this basic criminal law. The painful feature is that even the Public Prosecutor, who represented the State, did not raise any objection for the manner in which the charges were framed against the accused in this case and it appears that he also was a consenting party for this way of criminal trial before the Court of Sessions. Unfortunately, as this appeal has come up for trial nearly eight years after the disposal by the trial court, this way of trial by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karaikal, comes to the notice of this Court only now. Anyhow, as it is too late now and the Presiding Judge also seems to have already retired, there is no other go except to feel sorry for such instances, happening in the trial court at Pondicherry.