KHADER MOIDEEN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal challenges the judgment of the VI Additional Sessions Division, Chennai made in S.C.No.317 of 1999, whereby the sole accused/appellant stood charged, tried and found guilty under Section 302 IPC and awarded life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo 3 months R.I.

(2.) THE short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated thus: a) P.W.1 is the son of the deceased M.M. Johara. THE sister of the accused was given in marriage to an another son of the deceased. THEy were all living together within the jurisdiction of the respondent police station. On the date of occurrence, that was on 10.08.1998, P.W.1, due to illness, did not go to college and was staying in the house. At about 1.30 p.m., he saw through the window the accused coming inside the house. Immediately, the deceased asked the reasons for his coming. THE accused replied that he just came to see them. b) P.W.1 was hearing the voice of the accused and the deceased from the kitchen side. Within a few minutes, he heard the distressing cry of his mother and he rushed there, where he found the accused stabbing the deceased with knife on the right side of her neck. He just went nearby to her rescue. At that time, the accused pushed him down and went through the backyard. c) P.W.2 was also able to see the accused running away from the place of occurrence. Immediately, P.W.1 and others took the severely injured Johara to Vijaya Hospital, where they advised to take her to Royapettah Government Hospital. P.W.11, the Doctor attached to Royapettah Government Hospital, medically examined her and declared her dead. Ex.P.10 is the accident register. d) P.W.1 proceeded to the respondent police station and gave Ex.P.1, the complaint to P.W.13, the Sub Inspector of Police. On the strength of Ex.P.1, a case came to be registered in Crime No.2021 of 1998 under Section 302 IPC. Ex.P.13, the express F.I.R. was despatched to the Court. e) P.W.14, the Inspector of Police, on receipt of the copy of the F.I.R., took up the investigation, proceeded to the spot and made an inspection in the presence of the witnesses. He prepared Ex.P.3, the observation mahazar and Ex.P.14, the rough sketch. He also recovered bloodstained earth and sample earth from the place of occurrence under a cover of mahazar. He proceeded to the Government Hospital, Royapettah and conducted inquest on the dead body of the deceased in the presence of the witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared Ex.P.15, the inquest report. THEn, the dead body was sent for the purpose of autopsy. f) P.W.12, the Doctor attached to the Government Hospital, Royapettah, on receipt of the requisition, has conducted post-mortem on the dead body of the deceased and has issued Ex.P.12, the post-mortem certificate, wherein he has opined that the deceased would appear to have died of injuries sustained by her. g) Pending investigation, P.W.14 arrested the accused on 12.8.1998. THE accused came forward to give confessional statement, which was recorded in the presence of the witnesses, the admissible part of which was marked as Ex.P.16. Pursuant to the same, the accused produced M.O.1, knife, M.O.8, gloves and M.O.9, shirt, which were recovered under a cover of mahazar. THE accused was sent for judicial remand. All the material objects recovered were subjected to chemical analysis by the Forensic Science Department. On completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed the final report.

(3.) THE Court heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the above contentions and has paid its anxious consideration on the submissions made.