NAZIR HUSSAIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the appellants were put on trial as A-1 and A-2 on file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Chennai in S.C. No.507 of 2003. By judgment dated 25.09.2006, they were found guilty for the offence under Sections 120(B), 302, 380 and 201 of I.P.C., convicted and sentenced as detailed below:-

(2.) THE appellants (hereinafter will be referred to as the accused with the rank as arraigned before the trial court) for the sake of convenience in this appeal.

(3.) IN the mean time, P.W.1, a resident of AB481, 5th Sector, 24th street, K.k. Nagar and civil contractor by profession on 20.10.2002, went around 8.00 a.m., to place certain orders with A.K.R. Hardwares near Kasi Theatre and after placing orders, when he was going on his two wheeler, M-80 motor cycle at about 8.30 a.m., he saw a crowd near the Garden Wines and when he went there along with one Gopal of A.K.R. Hardwares and yet another, he found a gunny bag and on opening the gunny bag, he found a trunk of a person belonged to Muslim community. Thereafter, he went to K-7, K.K. Nagar Police Station and lodged the complaint, Ex.P.1 to P.W.32, the INspector of Police, who in turn registered the case in Cr.No. 2266 of 2002 for the offence under Section 302 of I.P.C. and prepared the printed F.I.R., Ex.P.38. Thereafter, he visited the place where the gunny bag was found lying, prepared observation mahazar, Ex.P.39, drew rough sketch, Ex.P.47 in the presence of witnesses. He made photographs of trunk to be taken with the help of P.W.15. Photographs (7 series) is Ex.P.7 and Negative (5 series) is Ex.P.8. Then he recovered the plastic paper, M.O.1; plastic bag, M.O.2 (2 series) and gunny bag, M.O.3 used for packing the trunk, under the cover of mahazar, Ex.P.40 in the presence of the attesting witness. P.W.32 sent the same through the Head Constable, P.W.22 to Forensic Science Department through court along with a letter for chemical analysis. Thereafter, P.W.32 held inquest on the trunk in the presence of the panchayatars, prepared inquest report, Ex.P.41. Thereafter, he summoned for scientific expert and also for sniffed dog. He also made photographs of the gunny bag and trunk to be taken. Then he sent the trunk of the male to the Government Royapettah Hospital along with a letter, Ex.P.42 requesting for postmortem. Thereafter, he was waiting for tip-off in regard to trunk on the pretext that some clues may come to light and he continued to investigate the matter. On 22.10.2002 he made a request for taking D.N.A. Test and Finger Print through court. Photographs viewing the trunk and lower limbs and their negatives taken by P.W.15 are M.O.7 to M.O.10.