EENAMUTHU Vs. STATE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MORAPPANADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Among three accused in the case, who are brothers, the appellant is A-1 and the accused were charged under Section 302 read with 34 IPC by the learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thoothukudi, in S.C.No. 47 of 1998 on the allegation that on 13.2.1996 at 5.3 0 p.m. A-1 to A-3, with an intention to finish off the deceased, attacked the deceased, in that, A-1 beat the deceased with wooden log on the chest and A-2 stamped him on the chest and stomach while A-3 beat him with wooden log on the thigh, hand and rear portion of head with the result, the deceased succumbed to the injuries at 8 p.m. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined P.Ws.l to 15, marked Exhibits P-1 to P-17 and produced M.Os.l to 6. The learned trial Judge, on conclusion of the trial, by order dated 7.11.2002, acquitted A-2 and A-3 however convicted A-1, the appellant herein, for an offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. Aggrieved against the order of conviction and sentence, the present appeal has been preferred.

(2.) The prosecution case, as put forth by its witnesses, is concisely narrated below; (a) P. Ws. 1 and 2 are the wife and sister respectively of the deceased and they are eye-witnesses to the occurrence. P.W.I deposed that the accused and the deceased belong to the same village and the deceased was working with the first accused for two months prior to the occurrence and since the salary given by the accused was insufficient, the deceased went for employment with some other person and on account of that, there was enmity between the first accused and the deceased and ten days prior to the occurrence, the deceased was arrested and sent to jail in a prohibition case. During the absence of the deceased, there was a wordy quarrel between P.W.1/wife of the deceased and the appellant and on the same being reported to the deceased on release from prison, the deceased questioned the accused and under such circumstances, on 13.2.1996 at 5.30p.m. when P.W.1 was standing in the bus stand along with P. W.2 and the deceased, all the three accused came there, A-1 with wooden log assaulted the deceased on the chest and when the deceased fell down, A-2 stamped him on the chest while A-3 with wooden log assaulted the deceased on the head and backside of the neck. The accused, after threatening P.W.1, ran away from the scene of occurrence. Thereafter, with the help of a police jeep, the deceased was taken to the Medical College Hospital, Palayamkottai, and on examination of the deceased, the Medical Officer declared him dead. The Head Constable, who accompanied P.W.1 recorded her statement under Exhibit P. 1 attested by P. W.2. (b) P.W.2, in her evidence, corroborated the testimony of P.W. 1. (c) P.W.3, brother of the deceased, in his evidence stated that on coming to know about the occurrence he reached the scene of occurrence and accompanied the deceased to the Hospital along with P.W.1. (d) P. W.5, Jeep driver deposed that on the request of P.W.1, he took the deceased to the Hospital, (e) P.Ws.4 and 6, who were examined to speak about motive part of the prosecution case and the enmity between the accused and the deceased did not support the case of the prosecution, therefore, they were treated as hostile. (f) P.W. 12, Head Constable, in his evidence, stated that he was travelling in the Jeep driven by P.W.S, on 13.2.1996 and at Anandanambi Kurichi Bus stop on hearing the noise of P.W.I, he enquired P.W.I and took the deceased who was in unconscious condition in the Jeep to the Medical College Hospital, Palayamkottai at 7 p.m. At 8 pm., the Medical Officer/P.W. 14 on examination of the deceased, declared him dead, whereupon, P.W. 12, received the complaint/Exhibit P-1 from P.W. 1 and it was attested by P. W.2. After reaching the police station, P.W. 12 registered a case in Crime No.26 of 1996 for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and for- warded the FIR/Exhibit P-4 to the Court and copies thereof to the superior officials. (g) P.W.I 5, the Inspector of Police, on receipt of copy of Exhibit P-4 at 7.00 a.m., took up investigation and reached the Medical College Hospital, Tirunelveli where he conducted inquest over the body of the deceased in the presence of panchayatars and witnesses. Exhibit P-12 is the Inquest Report. At the scene of occurrence, he prepared observation mahazor and rough sketch Exhibits P-2 and 13 respectively . He sent the dead body through the Head Constable P.W.11 with a requisition/Exhibit P-9 to the Medical Officer to conduct post-mortem. (h) P.W.9, the Medical Officer, on receipt of the requisition from the Investigating Officer, conducted post-mortem at 1.15 a.m on 14.2.1996 and issued post-mortem certificate Exhibit P-10, wherein, he noticed the following:

(3.) On Dissection of head: Bruising of inner aspect of tissue of scalp on the right side of occipital region. Fracture of posterior cranial fossa of base of skull on the right and left side Heart: All Chambers contained a little blood Lungs:Cut Section congested Hyold bone: Intact Stomach: Empty Mucosa: Normal Liver: Spleen and kidneys: Cut Section congested Bladder: Empty Brain : Cut Section congested and oedematous" The doctor opined that the deceased would appear to have died of multiple injuries. (i) P.W.11, Head Constable, recovered M.Os. 1 to 3, the bloodstained cloths of the deceased and handed over the same to the Inspector of Police. (j) P.W.15, the Investigating Officer, on coming to know about the surrender of the accused before Judicial Magistrate, Srivaikundam, took them into police custody on 4.3.1996. A-1 gave voluntary confession statement and the admissible portion thereof is marked as Exhibit P.M. In pursuance of the same, the Investigating Officer recovered wooden logs M.Os.4 to 6 under Exhibit P-15. Thereafter, the accused were sent to judicial custody. (k) The recovered material objects were despatched to the Court along with requisition under Exhibit P-5 to send the same for forensic examination. Exhibits P-7 and 8 are chemical analysis and serological reports respectively. The Investigating Officer, after examining the witnesses and receiving medical and forensic opinions, concluded the investigation and on 15.5.1996, laid final report against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. 3. The learned trial Judge, with reference to the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution, questioned the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C, for which, they denied their complicity in the crime and pleaded innocence. No oral or documentary evidence was let in by the defence.