SANGILI @ SANGILIMADASAMY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal has been directed against the Judgment, dated 20.03.2015, made in S.C. No. 98 of 2013, whereby the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, found the appellant guilty and convicted him under Section 302 I.P.C., and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief is that the de facto complainant, namely, Subramania Asari is a resident of Kuruvikulam Village and he is the father of the deceased-Mariappan. The appellant/accused, namely, Sangili @ Sangilimadasamy, who belongs to Sattur Nalli Village, is the cousin of the wife of the deceased, namely, Meena, who belongs to Kalugumalai. The deceased-Mariappan and Meena fell in love with each other and got married twelve years back. The deceased-Mariappan was working abroad and during 2008 he had come back and when he intended to go abroad again for employment, his wife Meena, who was not interested in her husband going abroad again, had prevented him from making arrangements to go abroad and with regard to the said issue, there was a dispute between them and due to the said dispute, Meena had committed suicide by self-immolation and in respect of which, a case in Crime No. 25 of 2008 was registered under Section 306 I.P.C., in Kuruvikulam Police Station against the deceased-Mariappan and his mother-Sendammal and inasmuch as the said case having ended in acquittal, the appellant/accused, who got enraged with the deceased,had planned to murder him and accordingly, on 17.07.2011, at about 17.30 hours, when the deceased-Mariappan had gone to the workshop belonging to Rajendran, to take back his TVS XL Two Wheeler left there for repairing the appellant/accused cut the deceased Mariappan with Aruval on his neck, hands and face inflicting cut injuries on his head portion, below the left forearm, right hand middle finger, ring finger, left hand palmar, left hand shoulder, right hand pollex and right hand palmar and disentangled the head of the deceased and thereby, the appellant/accused had committed the murder punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. Subsequently, with regard to the said incident, the father of the deceased had lodged a complaint before the respondent-Police.

(3.) The respondent-Police, based on the complaint lodged by the father of the deceased, had registered a case in Crime No. 146 of 2011, against the appellant/accused under Section 302 I.P.C., and after thorough investigation, the respondent-Police filed the final report before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankovil, who had taken cognizance of the final report in P.R.C.No. 2 of 2013 and inasmuch as the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C., being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Judicial Magistrate, after compliance of procedure under Section 207 Cr.P.C., 1973 had committed the case, under Section 209 Cr.P.C., 1973 to the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, who took the same on file in S.C.No. 98 of 2013 and made over the same to the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli/Trial Court, for trial. Subsequently, the Trial Court had framed charges under Section 302 I.P.C., against the appellant/accused and when the appellant/accused was explained and questioned about the charges framed against him, he had denied the charges framed against him and sought for trial to prove his case and accordingly, trial was conducted.