GOVINDARAJ Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants, Govindaraj and Manivasagam, who are brothers, were tried in S.C. No. 127 of 1983 on the file of the Sessions Judge, West Thanjavur at Thanjavur, for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, on the allegation! that on 18th July 1983, at about 5 p.m., on the highway leading to Tiruppanandal, 2 kilometres from Tiruppanandal police-station, they caused the death of Theagaraj Pillai, a landlord as well as Sub Collector of Madras at the relevant time, by cutting him with an aruval on his head and other parts. of his body resulting in his instantaneous death.

(2.) The. Trial Court found. the appellants guilty under Section 302 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced each one of them to undergo imprisonment for life.

(3.) The case of the prosecution can be briefly stated as follows: P.W. 5 is the younger brother of the deceased. The deceased, his younger brother (P.W. 5) and their father, Govindaswami Pillai, own lands at Tiruppanandal. A portion of the land had been taken on lease by Natesan, the father of the appellants. Since Natesan did not pay the lease arrears regularly, Govindaswami Pillai, the father of P.W. 5 and the deceased filed a petition for eviction before the Revenue Court, Kumbakonam, in Petition No. 439 of 1980 and obtained an order of eviction by an order dated 11-3-1981 marked as Ex. P. 2. In pursuance of the said Order, Govindaswami Pillai took possession of the lands from Natesa Pillai, the father of the appellants on 18-4-1981, as seen from the delivery memo marked as Ex. P. 3 in this case. Even after eviction, the appellants have been giving trouble and they did not allow Govindaswami Pillai and the deceased to peacefully enjoy their pio-perties. This necessitated Govindaswami Pillai in giving a complaint on 28-3-1981 before P.W. 11, the Sub- Inspector of Police, Tiruppanandal. P.W. 11, the Sub-Inspector of Police warned the first appellant and closed the petition. Even subsequently, it is seen from the evidence of P.W. 3, Dhanapal. who is now cultivating the land of the deceased that the first appellant was threatening him while he was engaged in the irrigation of the land.