ANNAMALAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19th November, 1982 of the Court of Session, Trichi, in S.C.No.86 of 1981.

(2.) IT arises from these facts: (i) The accused hails from Chinna Chithur village, which is situate within the jurisdiction of Uppiliapuram Police Station. P.W.1 is his elder brother. He has given his daughter born through his first wife to P.W.3 who is the son of P.W.2. P.Ws.1 and 2 are adjacent land-owners. P.W.1 became a widower some time prior to the occurrence, which happened on 2.1.1981. Seethammal (since deceased) was originally married to the accused. No issue was born to the deceased. So the accused, thinking that the deceased could not give birth to a child, decided to divorce her once and for all. A Panchayat took place in the village. P.W.4wasone of the panchayatdars and in that panchayat, the divorce between the deceased and the accused was effected. Thereafter, the deceased went to her parents� home and resided there for some time, (ii) P.W.1 decided to marry the deceased and, in fact, married her after paying Rs.600 to the accused, the amount spent by him for contracting his marriage with the deceased, some five or six years prior to the occurrence. Though the accused divorced the deceased, yet he was having the desire to have sexual connection with her. So, some time prior to the occurrence, he expressed his desire to have sexual intercourse with the deceased, to which course, the deceased was not amenable. She complained of the same to P.W.1. Subsequently want of cordiality came to prevail between P.W.1 and the accused. The ill-will between P.W.1 and the accused further heightened, when the accused demanded more properties towards his share from P.W.1. This apart, the accused gave a complaint to the police against P.W.1 his brother, as if he had committed theft of some utensils from his house. The case was referred. However, the feelings of animosity between them on account of the vexatious complaint got nurtured and developed further. (iii) On the early morning of the day of occurrence, the deceased went to the nearby forest to collect firewood. P.W.5, who was available then in the forest, saw the deceased cutting the wood for fuel purposes P.W.2 had been to his fields for turning out agricultural operations. P.W.1 also, for a similar purpose, went to his fields. At about 9 A.M., P.W.2 saw the accused carrying a body on his shoulders and dropping the same into the well situate in his lands. He raised a hue and cry. Attracted by such cries, P.W.1 and P.W.3 who were available in the adjacent fields came running and in that process, they happened to see the accused running away from there. The body thrown was recovered from the well and it was found out to,be the body of the deceased. (iv) P.W.1 went to Uppiliapuram Police Station and gave Ex.P1 complaint at 10.45 P.M. P.W.13, who was incharge of the station registered a case in Crime No.1 of 1981 under Sec.302 of the Indian Penal Code. He prepared express reports and sent the same to the concerned officials. He also sent a V.H.F. message to the Inspector of Police P.W.14. (v) P.W.14 the Inspector of Police, on receipt of the message at 3 A.M. on 3.1.1981 took up further investigation in this case. He reached the scene at 6.30 A.M. He inspected the scene and prepared Ex.P2 observation mahazar. He also drew a rough sketch of the scene of occurrence Ex.P13. Ex.P2 was attested by P.W.6 and another. He caused photographs to be taken of the scene by P.W.10. M.O.4 series are the photographs and M.O.3 series are the negatives. Then he sent a requisition Ex.P3 to the doctor P.W.7 for conducting autopsy over the body of the deceased in the scene itself. Between 8 AM., and 11.30 AM., he held inquest over the body of the deceased. During the inquest he examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and 5 and others. Ex.P12 is the inquest report. He, thereafter, handed over the body to the constable P.W.11 along with Ex.P3 requisition for guarding the same till the autopsy was conducted. (vi) The doctor P.W.7 reached the scene village and conducted autopsy over the body of the deceased at 11.30 A.M. on 3.1.1981. Ex.P4 is the post-mortem certificate. The doctor opined that the deceased would appear to have died of shock and haemorrhage due to multiple injuries and the injuries could have been caused by cutting with a weapon like M.O.1 aruval. He also opined that external injury No.4 with its corresponding internal injuries is fatal in nature. (vii) At 1 P.M. P.W.14, Inspector of Police seized from the land of one Sobanapuram Rengaraj M.O.7 series bloodstained withered leaves, M.O.8 series bloodstained stones and M.O.9 bloodstained earth. He also noticed track of blood from there till upto the well, where the body was dropped. Regarding this he prepared Ex.P5 observation mahazar, which was attested by P.W.8 and another. He searched for the accused, but he was absconding. (viii) On 5.1.1981 at 9.15 AM., he arrested the accused at the Mayilapallam Road in Chinna Chittur in the presence of P.W.9. The accused on interrogation gave a confessional statement, the admissible portion of which is Ex.P6 pursuant to the confession, the accused, took P.W.14 and others to a mango tree situate on the west of his cattle shed and took out and produced M.O.1 aruval and M.O.2 bedsheet kept in between the two branches of the mango tree, which was seized under Ex.P7 mahazar. Exs.P6 and P7 were attested by PiW.9. On 6.1.1981, he sent the accused to the Court for remand. On 20.1.1981, he gave Ex.P8 requisition to the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Thuraiyur for sending the incriminating objects to the Chemical Examiner for the purposes of analysis. (ix) P.W.12, the Head Clerk attached to the Court of the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Thuraiyur sent the incriminating articles as per the directions of the Magistrate to the Chemical Examiner under the original of Ex.P9 office copy of letter. Exs.P10 and P11 are the reports of the Chemical Examiner and Serologist respectively, (x) After completing the formalities of the inveti-gation, P.W.14 filed a report under Sec.173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Thuraiyur, on 24.4.1981 for offences under Secs.302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, appeared to have been committed by the accused.

(3.) THE accused denied the same and claimed to be tried. THE prosecution in proof of the charges, examined P.Ws.1 to 14, filed Exs.P1 to P13 and marked M.Os.1 to 9.