POONGAVANAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 22.08.2007 made in S.C.No.356 of 2006 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu.) RAJA ELANGO, J. This appeal arises out of the judgment made in S.C.No.356 of 2006 by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu, convicting the appellant/accused for an offence under Section 302 IPC., and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the prosecution case are as follows: (i) P.W.1 living alone in Gandhi Nagar, Govilambakkam, near Tambaram, since she was deserted by her husband P.W.2 Nagaraj. The accused Poongavanam is also residing in the same village. Taking advantage of the loneliness of P.W.1, the accused persuaded her coerced and compelled her to have intercourse with him. Initially, P.W.1 refused and resisted the request of the accused and on the particular day, the accused trespassed to the house of P.W.1, where he kept Rs.2000/- under the pillow and by threatening P.W.1 had intercourse. Thereafter with the consent of P.W.1, the accused continued the illicit intimacy with P.W.1 and through the illicit intimacy, P.W.1 gave birth to a male child. On intimation of the same, the accused visited the house of P.W.1 and slept in the house of P.W.1. when P.W.1 went out of the house for cleaning the vessels, she saw the accused killing the child by pressing the child neck with his legs. The child succumbed to death due to the injury caused by the accused. ii) PW1 set the law in motion. On the basis of complaint lodged by PW1, case was registered in Cr.No.1495 of 2005 (Ex.P17) under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC. (iii). PW9-Inspector of Police had taken up investigation, he inspected scene of occurrence and prepared Ex.P2-Observation Mahazar and Ex.P18-Rough Sketch. Chudidhar M.O.1 was seized under Ex.P19-Seizure Mahazar. In the occurrence place inquest was held on the body of the child and Ex.P20 is the inquest report. On requisition from Investigating Officer PW6-Dr.K.Madhikran had conducted autopsy on the body of child and noted the injuries in the body. PW6 opined that the child would appear to have died of injury to the neck. Then P.W.9 examined the witnesses and recorded their statements. (iv). On 5.10.2005, accused was arrested by PW9-Investigating Officer. Blood sample of P.W.1-Shanthi and accused-Poongavanam and also Femur Bone with soft tissue of child were collected and sent for DNA test. After conducting DNA test, PW8-Vanaja (Chemical Examiner) opined that appellant/accused is the biological father of the deceased child. P.W.9 received the DNA report Ex.P16 and send the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alandur. On 09.11.2005, P.W.9 Investigating office went to the Government Hospital, Rayapettah and examined the Doctor P.W.6 who conducted the post mortem and received the post mortem report(Ex.P20). Upon receipt of Chemical Analysis report and on completion of investigation final report was filed against the accused for the offences under Sections 302 and 201 IPC.

(3.) P.W.1 deposed that regarding the persuasion and compulsion of accused and the fact that he paid Rs.2,000/- and forcibly had intercourse with her and subsequently after gave birth of the child, the accused visited the house and killed the child by pressing the neck of the child. P.W.2 Nagarajan, the husband of P.W.1 deposed before the Court that on his arrival to the house of P.W.1, P.W.1 informed that the child was born to accused Poongavanam, so he need not visit the house hereafter and he was asked to take the children born through him to P.W.1. Accordingly, he left the place along with his children.