VEDIAPPAN Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appeal against the Judgment of the Sessions Court, Dharmapuri District at Krishnagiri in S.C. No. 66 of 1983. The Appeal coming on for hearing on Friday, the 31st day of July, 1987 and on this day upon perusing the Petition of Appeal the Record of the evidence and Proceedings before the said Court ofSessions and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. R. Sankarasubbu. Advocate for the Appellant (Accused) and of Mr. A.N, Rajan, Govt. Advocate (Criminal Side) on behalf of the respondent, the Court delivered the following Judgment: -

(2.) The facts leading to the conviction of the accused need narration. The accused appellant, hereinafter referred to as accused, is a resident of Eachampadi village. He was married to Susila, the deceased. The deceased and the accused were living in Elagiri village for some time. There were bickering in the family of the deceased and the accused often. The deceased always used to go to the house of her mother, Kuzhandai alias Chinnammal, examined as P.W. 3 in the case. The accused took his wife, Susila, from Eachampadi on her parents house at Jarugu and left her in P.W. 3s house for celebration of Deepavali in the year 1982. After the festival, the accused asked his mother-in-law to send back his wife. He also asked his wife to come along with him. But the deceased refused, P.W. 7, Kunjappan, is a close relative of the deceased. He was a tailor by profession at Adhiyamanpatti. The accused asked him to mediate in the matter 2nd accordingly on 2-1-1983, the date of occurrence, at about. 9.00 a.m., the accused approached P.W. 7, Kunjappan, to go along with him to persuade his wife, the deceased, to go with him. Accordingly, at the request of P.W. 7, P.W. 3 allowed the deceased to proceed with the accused and P.W. 7. P.W. 7 also traveled with the deceased and the accused, but P.W. 7 got down at Gangalapuram and both the accused and the deceased got down at Kambainallur and P.W. 2, Saravanan, saw both of them alighting from the bus on 2-1-1983 at Kambainallur. The deceased and P. W. 1 proceeded to Eachampadi. P.W. 1 is Anbu alias Anbumani and on the night of 2-1-1983 at about 11.00 p.m. he was on his way back of Kambainallur from Eachampadi where he went to see a play. He saw the bloodstained clothes of the accused and asked him as to what the matter was. To him, the accused is said to have voluntarily made a confession stating that he was bringing his wife home from the house of his mother-in-law, P.W.3, that on the way they sat for sometime in a field and then he had sexual intercourse withT her and after that she confessed to him her intimacy with Vadivelu her sisters husband and she also told him that she would continue to have extra-marital relationship with the said Vadivelu, husband of her sister, and that if he objects to it, she will inform the police that the accused is a naxalite, that fearing her, he took a stone and hit on her head and again hit on her head and that she lay motionless for about half an hour and then finding that she is dead, he left the place. P.W. 1 is said to have told the accused to surrender to the police. Accordingly, the accused went to the police station and gave Ex. P. 1, a complaint, at about midnight on 2/3-1- 1983 itself, The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.W. 8, seized M.Os. 1 and 2, the bloodstained dhoti and shirt from the accused under Form No. 95, Ex. P.2 attested by P.W. 1, PW. 8 registered a case in Crime No.1 of 1983 under section 302 I.P.C. and informed the Inspector of police, P. W. 11, at about 2.30.a.m. on 3-1-83 and. went along with the Inspector to the scene of occurrence and assisted the Inspector in the investigation. P.W. 11 prepared an observation mahazar, Ex. P. 4, and a rough sketch, Ex. P. 22, at about 6.00 a.m. on 3-1-1983 and held inquest over the dead body of Susila between 7.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. on 3-1-83 and prepared Ex. P. 23, inquest report. He then sent the body of Susila for postmortem examination, to P.W. 5, Dr. Vijayakumari, Medical Officer, Government Hospital, Harur, who conducted autopsy on the dead body of Susila at 11.00 a.m. on 4 1-1983. She found the followings injuries: 1. A lacerated wound of 6 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on the right occipital bone transversely; 2. A lacerated wound of 4 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on the right occipital bone transversely placed 1 below injury No. 1; 3. A lacerated wound of 6 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on the right occipital region transversely placed 1 blow injury No.2; 4. A lacerated wound of 4 cm x 1 cm x bone deep vertically placed on the right occipital region 1 left to the above mentioned three injuries; Multiple abrasions of & cm x 1 cm often in number on the right axilla; 5. Twelve abrasions of 1/2 cm x 1 cm on the right side of the chest wall in the mid axillary line; 6. Eight abrasions of 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm in size on the right side of the abnominal wall. 7. Ten abrasions of 1/2 cm. x 1/2 cm. on the left groin; 8. Twenty abrasions of 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm on the right side of the thigh laterally; and 9. Ten abrasions of 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm on the posterior aspect of left knee joint. On dissection of injuries Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 P.W. 5 found that there are subaponemastic hemorrhages present and that there was no fracture of skull bones, but there was subarachnoid haemorrhage and hemorrhagic spots were seen on the brain illatter on the right side. In the opinion of P. W. 5 the deceased would appear to have died of shock and haemorrhage due to the injuries sustained to the skull bone and brain about 35-36 hours prior to postmortem examination. Ex. P. 8 is the postmortem certificate. In her view, death could have been instantaneous and that injuries Nos. 1 to 4 are sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The accused made a judicial confession to P.W. 6, Judicial Second Class Magistrate, who on a requisition from the Inspector of Police, Harur, recorded the confession. Ex. P. 12 is the judicial confession recorded by P.W. 6 the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Harur. After completing investigation, the Incharge-sheet was laid by one Vellaiyan, Inspector Of Police, Harur, who was not examined in his case.

(3.) The defence was one of total denial. The Sessions Judge, however, found the accused guilty of the offence under section 304 Part II, IPC and convicted and sentenced him to rigors imprisonment for eight years as stated already. Aggrieved, the appellant has filed this appeal.