SHANMUGA KODUMBAN Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The seven appellants have been convicted under Secs.147 and 325, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced. Appellants Nos. 1 and 2 to 2 and 3 years rigorous imprisonment concurrent, and appellants Nos. 3 to 7 to 18 months and 18 months, concurrent. Appellants Nos. 2, 3, 4 have been called upon to show cause why their sentences should not be enhanced.

(2.) The main circumstance of this case is not seriously traversed. One Rajapandia Naick was beaten to death on the night of 19 May, 1929. The question raised on appeal is, which, if any, of the appellants took part in the crime. The death is said to have occurred at about 8 P. M. and by 11 p.m. The karnam P. W. No. 4 had the names of all the accused, and entered them in his report Ex. B. It has also been elicited on behalf of the accused that the eye- witness P.W. No. 1 mentioned all of the accused in detail when the Sub-Inspector investigated under Section 174, Criminal Procedure Code, on 20 May. On 24 May the Sub-Magistrate took statements under Section 164 when this witness named accused No. 1 as the instigator, and accused No. 2 as the man who first struck, adding "His men also beat him." It is now argued that on that date the witness only knew of accused Nos. 1 and 2, and the rest have been subsequently implicated. But having regard to the report Ex. B and what was elicited about the inquest, it is more natural to suppose that the witness meant the other accused and did not name them because he was not asked to name them. He is corroborated by two other eye-witnesses P.W. Nos. 3 and 5. The first of these P.W. No. 3 is certain that he gave all then names to the Magistrate, though in his statement also only accused Nos. 1 and 2 are named. As the names were already out and on record and in the light of the evidence of P. W. No. 1 the point is not of very much importance, especially when the last eye witness P. W. No. 5 on the very same day, named all the accused except the sixth.

(3.) However, the proceeding of prime importance is the trial, the learned Judge observes that the witnesses were unshaken by cross-examination and gave him the impression that they were speaking the truth. I see no reason to differ.