M GANESAN Vs. STATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is the accused in S.C.No.346/1998 on the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Tirunelveli. He was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three months with a further direction that the sentence already undergone by him is directed to be set off against the sentence imposed on him under Section 428 Cr.P.C, on a charge for having murdered his mother-in-law Mariammal in the early morning of 31.03.1998.

(2.) THE sum and substance of the case of the prosecution are as follows: THE Appellant/accused is the son-in-law of the deceased. P.W.1 is the wife of the accused and daughter of the deceased. P.W.1 was married to the accused about 16 years before the date of occurrence that happened on 31.03.1998. P.W.2 is the minor son of the deceased. P.Ws.3, and 4 are the daughters and P.W.5 is the son of the deceased respectively and all of them were residing in chinnakalanpatti village. P.Ws.6 and 7 were the residents of the Chinnakalanpatti. After the marriage, there were frequent misunderstandings and quarrel between P.W.1 and the accused. So within a short period of her marriage she (P.W.1) left her matrimonial home and was residing with her mother. A week before the date of occurrence, the deceased left the village Chinnakalanpatti to Kancheepuram. During the absence of the deceased in the village, there was a quarrel between P.W.1 and the accused since the accused had questioned P.W.1 suspecting her fidelity, as she was found traveling in a cycle with some other person. Subsequently, when the deceased returned to her native Village, P.W.1 complained about the quarrel that took place between her and the accused. On 31.03.1998, when P.W.1 was cleaning the front yard of the house, the accused and his mother scolded the deceased complaining that the deceased had not brought up her daughter (P.W.1) with virtuous manner which resulted in a wordy quarrel. On hearing the complaint from P.W.1, the deceased shouted at the accused that if he had spoken anything ill of her daughter she would not allow the matter to set at rest and she would beat him with broom-stick. THE accused who is the son-in-law of the deceased on hearing such words from his mother-in-law, got suddenly provoked and shouted at the deceased that it was the deceased who was responsible for all the happenings and only if she died P.W.1 would behave properly and so saying the accused assaulted the deceased with an Aruval . When the deceased attempted to prevent the assault, a cut injury was caused to her left wrist, as a result of which the distal part of the left forearm was severed. THE deceased caused another cut injury in the right forearm and other two cut injuries on her head. On hearing the alarm of the deceased, P.Ws.1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 who were all standing there raised an alarm. P.W.7 who came there also raised an alarm. Immediately, the accused left the place with the aruval. THEreafter, P.W.1, took the deceased with the help of P.W.3 (sister of P.W.1) in an auto and went to the Thiruvengadam Police Station at 08.30 a.m. P.W.1 lodged the complaint since the injured was unable to speak. P.W.12, the Sub Inspector of Police recorded the statement from P.W.1 and obtained her signature. THE said statement is marked as Ex.P.8. THEreafter, P.W.12 registered a case in Crime No.146 of 1998 under Section 307 IPC and prepared the FIR which is marked as Ex.P.9. THEreafter, P.W.12 sent the injured to Sankarankoil Government Hospital along with a memo. THEreafter, she was referred to Tirunelveli Medical College Hospital where she succumbed to the injuries at 08.30 p.m. on the same day.

(3.) P.W.11, who on receipt of the requisition given by the Investigating Officer, conducted autopsy on 01.04.1998 between 2.15 p.m. and 3.30 p.m., and issued the Post-mortem Certificate wherein the following injuries have been noted.