ARADADI RAMUDU ALIAS AGGIRAMUDU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is made to the judgment of the Additional Sessions Division, pondicherry made in S. C. No. 99 of 1997 whereby the sole accused/appellant stood charged, tried and found guilty as per the charge of murder and awarded life imprisonment.

(2.) THE short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated thus: (a) The deceased Gangammal was the wife of the accused/appellant. P. Ws. 3 and 4 were the son and daughter of the accused and the deceased. The accused, though married and had two children, he never cared to maintain the family and he was carrying a wayward life. He used to consume liquor every day and quarrelled with his wife and tortured her. On 13. 8. 1997 at about 6. 45 hours, he went home after 4 days and quarrelled with her in drunken mood. He suspected her fidelity and tried to strangulate her. She tried to ward off the same but she could not bear the pain. The accused brought a small knife and cut her on the neck. On hearing the distress cry, P. W. 2 neighbour rushed and found the victim with grievous injuries. The accused fled away from the place of occurrence. (b) P. W. 2 took the deceased in a rickshaw belonged to P. W. 5 to the Government Hospital, Yanam and p. W. 1, a Senior Medical Officer who was on duty gave initial treatment to her to whom the victim has stated that she was attacked by her husband and thus sustained injuries. He sent intimation to Yanam Police Station through Ex. P1. Since the condition of the victim was found to be serious, the doctor gave intimation to the Government Hospital, Kakkinada which was marked as Ex. P2. (c)P. W. 19 the Police Officer of the respondent Police Station, Yanam, on receipt of the information rushed to the Hospital and recorded the statement of the victim which was marked as Ex. P30. On the strength of Ex. P30, a case came to be registered in Crime No. 27 of 1997 under section 307 I. P. C. The F. I. R. , Ex. P31 was dispatched to court. On the same day, the accused was arrested. He gave confessional statement which was recorded and the admissible part of the same was marked as Ex. P. 23. Following the same, the accused produced M. O. 1 knife which was recovered under a cover of mahazar. (d) The victim was taken to the government Hospital, Kakkinada, at 14. 10 hours on 13. 8. 1997. P. W. 12 Assistant surgeon of Government Hospital, Kakinada admitted the victim and gave treatment to the injuries sustained by her. Despite performance of operation and treatment, the victim died on the same day. The death intimation was given to the Police. The case which was registered under section 307 I. P. C. was altered to section 302 IPC. (e) P. W. 20, the Inspection of Police, took up investigation. He proceeded to the spot, made an inspection and prepared the observation mahazar Ex. P20 in the presence of witnesses and drew a rough sketch Ex. P21. He also recovered the material objects from the place of occurrence. Photographs were taken which were marked as Exs. P6,7,8 and 9 series through P. W. 9. Further, he conducted inquest on the dead body of the deceased in the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared the inquest report Ex. P. 3. (f) Following the requisition made by the Investigating Officer, P. W. 13, doctor attached to the government Hospital conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and found the following external injuries:

(3.) ADVANCING the arguments on behalf of the appellant, the learned counsel would submit that the prosecution, in order to substantiate the charge of murder, has examined P. Ws. 3 and 4 who were the son and daughter of the accused and the deceased. When their evidence are looked into, it is seen that there are lot of discrepancies, apart from that, they are children. Added further learned counsel, in the instant case, P. W. 2 who was neighbour has reached the place of occurrence, after the occurrence was over. So far as the judgment of the trial court is concerned, the prosecution rests its case much on the statement given by the deceased to P. W. 1, doctor and also Ex. P30 , the statement given by the deceased to P. W. 19 Sub Inspector of Police of Yanam Police Station. Insofar as ex. P1 is concerned, it speaks only about the assault that was made by her husband/accused. So far as Ex. P30 is concerned, there was lot of discrepancies found. Hence, these two documents cannot be given much weight at all. Added further learned counsel, the medical opinion canvassed was inconsistent with that of Ex. P30, the statement recorded from the victim by the police. The alleged confessional statement and the recovery of weapon of crime-knife from the accused, were nothing but fabricated and it would not strengthen the case of the prosecution at no stretch of imagination. Hence, the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case but the trial court has taken an erroneous view and found the accused guilty of murder.