P MANIKANDAN Vs. STATE,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, being P.W.1, has come forward to file this appeal, challenging the judgment rendered by the III Additional District-cum-Sessions Judge, Kallakurichi acquitting respondents 2 to 4 for the offences charged under Section 294(b), 323 (against R2 and R3), 302 (against R2) and 302 r/w 34 IPC (against R3 & R4).

(2.) The sum and substance of the prosecution case against respondents 2 to 4 aforesaid is that, pursuant to the oral threat exerted, they attacked the deceased and caused death stating as to how the tiles of the second respondent's house could be damaged.

(3.) Ex.P.11 is the complaint registered by P.W.12 (Special Sub-Inspector) on receipt of the information that the deceased was taking treatment at Kallakurichi Hospital as in-patient. Accordingly, he received the complaint under Ex.P.11. After recording the statement and affixing the signature of the deceased, the complaint was registered under Ex.P.12 for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 307 IPC. Thereafter, the investigation was taken up by P.W.14 - Investigating Officer, on the very same day. In the presence of the witnesses, the observation mahazar and the rough sketch was prepared under Ex.P.13. Respondents 2 and 3 were arrested on 13.08.2016 and the confession statements were recorded, followed by recovery. The deceased died on 14.08.2016 at about 20.30 hours at the Government Hospital, Salem. On getting the information, the offence charged was altered to the major offence under Section 302 IPC, 302 r/w 34 IPC under Ex.P.14. The inquest report was prepared by P.W.14 on 15.08.2016 under Ex.P.15. The body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem through P.W.13.