SHANKAR Vs. STATEPOLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are A1 and A2, who are charged for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302 and 201 IPC. The trial Court on conclusion of trial found the appellants guilty and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment and to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 201 IPC and directed the sentences to run concurrently. The appellants were acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 364 IPC.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Vinoth Kumar was a Mason contractor. The first accused was a tenant in the house of the deceased and due to some bad association between the first accused and the deceased, P.W.1 the wife of the deceased asked the accused to vacate the premises. The accused 1 and 2 are brothers. On 22.04.2011 at 8.30 a.m. P.W.4 (who works under the deceased) met both the accused and deceased near Iyyappanthangal Bus Stop. Thereafter, the deceased asked P.W.4 to go for the work and informed him that he will join him by 11.00 a.m. But even after 1.00 p.m. the deceased did not come to the place of work. It is stated that the accused have taken him near the Jayavinayagar Temple at Retteri Lake, Porur. The deceased Vinoth Kumar was attacked by the accused and his head was dashed against the temple wall and thereby caused his death. To conceal the same, the appellants had thrown the body of the deceased in the lake.

(3.) On 22.04.2011, at about 5.30 p.m., P.W.1, the wife of the deceased, gave the complaint to the respondent police which was marked as Ex.P1, stating that her husband had not returned from the work and despite all her efforts to know about the whereabouts through his acquaints and friends, there was no trace of him. Initially, the respondent/police registered a case in Cr.No.139 of 2011 for man missing. Thereafter, P.W.4 informed P.W.1 that her husband was seen in the company of the appellants in a wine shop at Iyyappanthangal fully drunk and thereafter all the three were seen near the lake at about 12.30 p.m. After sometime, the appellants came to the place of work where P.W.4 was working and claimed that they had assaulted Vinoth Kumar, killed him and threw him in the lake and threatened P.W.4. Fearing about the consequences P.W.4 left his work and thereafter informed P.W.1. P.W.1 along with her mother, brother and others went in search of the deceased Vinoth Kumar near the lake and they also informed the fire service and they could not recover the body as it had become dark by then. On the next day i.e., on 23.4.2011 at about 11 a.m., the body of the deceased was seen floating in the lake and thereafter it was informed to the respondent/police. They reached the scene of occurrence and inquired the witnesses, conducted inquest and thereafter the body was sent for post-mortem to the Government Royapettah Hospital, Chennai. P.W.16 the doctor conducted the post-mortem and handed over the body to the relatives. P.W.6 has identified the accused and witnessed the fight between the accused and the deceased. P.W.17 the resident near the lake had seen the deceased drown. The accused were arrested. From the confession, articles were recovered and after recording 164 Cr.P.C. statements, Test Identification Parade was conducted. Thereafter charge sheet was filed against them.