MANICKAM ANANTHAN CHIDAMBARAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall govern these two appeals, namely, C.A.No.65 of 2008 by A-1 and A-2 and C.A.No.218 of 2008 by A-3.

(2.) Both the appeals challenge a judgment of the Principal District and Sessions Division, Perambalur, made in S.C.No.40 of 2006, whereby the appellants stood charged, tried and found guilty as follows: Accused ChargesFindingsSentehceA-1 to A3S.449 IPC Guilty 10 Years R.I each and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each, i/d to undergo 3 months R.I. each.A-1 to A-3S.302 r/w 34 IPC Guilty Life imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each, i/d to undergo 3 months S.I.each.The sentences imposed on the respective accused were ordered to run concurrently.

(3.) Short facts for the disposal of both the appeals can be stated thus:(a) The appellants/ accused and the deceased Govindasamy belonged to Koman village. P.W.1 is the wife, P.W.2 is the daughter and P.Ws.3 and 4 are the grandchildren of the deceased Govindasamy. Six years prior to the occurrence, Govindasamy lent Rs.5,000/- to A-1, which was not returned despite many demands. A Panchayat was convened but to no avail and thus, the relationship of Govindasamy and A-l was strained. A-2 is the son of A-l and A-3 was their associate. On 16.01.2006, when Govindasamy was sleeping in his house along with P.Ws.1 to 4, A-1 to A-3 committed a criminal trespass by entering into the house of Govindasamy at about 3.30 AM. At that time, A-l was having a torch in his hand. On hearing the noise, Govindasamy also took a torch. At that time, P.Ws.1 to 4 also woke up and they witnessed A-1 to A-3 armed with deadly weapons and A-1 by knife and A-2 and A-3 with 'Sulukki' attacked Govindasamy one after another. On hearing the distressing cry, A-1 to A-3 fled away from the scene of occurrence, (b) Immediately, Govindasamy was taken to the Government Hospital, Thanjavur and at about 5.30 AM, P.W.10, who was On duty, gave the treatment and the accident register copy issued by him is marked as Ex.P-4. An intimation was given to the out-post in the hospital.(c) A Head Constable attached to the Thanjavur Medical College Hospital, rushed to the hospital and he recorded the statement of Govindasamy, which is marked as Ex.P-6 and an intimation was given to the respondent Police Station and on the strength of which, a case came to be registered by the respondent Sub-Inspector of Police, P.W.12, in Crime No.2 of 2006 under sections 452, 324 and 506(II) I.P.C. The first information report Ex.P-7 was despatched to the Court. He went over to the place of occurrence and prepared an observation mahazar Ex.P-1 and rough sketch Ex.P-8 and recovered M.Os.1 and 3 to 7 under the cover of mahazar Ex.P-2 in the presence of witnesses.(d) the further investigation was taken up by P.W.13, Inspector of Police and on receiving the intimation as to the death of Govindasamy on 24.01.2006, he altered the case into under section 302 I.P.C. The amended first information report Ex.P-9 was despatched to the Court. P.W.13 went over to the hospital and conducted an inquest on the dead body of Govindasamy in the mortuary in the presence of witnesses and the panchayatdars and the inquest report is marked as Ex.P-10 and following the inquest, a requisition was given to the Government Hospital, for the purpose of post-mortem.(e) On receipt of the said requisition, P.W.11, doctor attached to the Thanjavur Government Hospital, conducted autopsy on the dead body of Govindasamy and gave a post-mortem certificate, Ex.P-5, wherein he opined that the deceased would appear to have died of complication due to multiple injuries Involving cut injury to intestine, (f) Pending investigation, the accused were arrested on 16.01.2006 and A-3 gave a confessional statement and the admissible portion is marked as Ex.P-12. Pursuant to which, he produced M.0.2 which was recovered under the cover of mahazar Ex.P-3 and all the accused were sent for judicial remand; On completion of investigation, P.W.13 filed the final report against the accused under section 302 I.P.C.(g) The case was committed to the Court of. Session, Perambalur and necessary charges were framed. In order to substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses and also relied on 12 exhibits and 7 material objects. On completion of the evidence on the side of the prosecution, the accused was questioned under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C as to the incriminating circumstances found against him in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, which he flatly denied as false. No defence witness was examined. The trial Court heard the arguments advanced and scrutinized the materials. On doing so, the trial Judge took the view that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and found the appellants/accused guilty and awarded the punishment of life imprisonment, which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court.