Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 305 (MAD)

Elumalai v. State through Inspector of Police

2006-02-08

A.R.RAMALINGAM, M.KARPAGAVINAYAGAM

body2006
Judgment :- (Appeal filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Kancheepuram dated 27.2.2002 made in S.C.No.310 of 2000.) M. Karpagavinayagam, J. Elumalai, the appellant herein has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 449 and 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years R.I and life imprisonment by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court, Kancheepuram) in S.C.No.310 of 2000 dated 27.02.2002.Both sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The brief facts, leading to the conviction, are as follows: The deceased Pushpavathi is the step sister of the accused/appellant. There is a dispute over the house properties between the accused/appellant and the deceased. The deceased filed a suit for partition against the accused/appellant and obtained a final decree in her favour. The civil Court ordered compensation to be paid by the accused to the deceased, but the accused requested the deceased not to go to Court for claiming compensation and the matter could be compromised, but the deceased did not agree for the same. Therefore, the accused had a grudge against the deceased. P.W.1 is the son-in-law of the deceased; P.W.2 Indira, who is the adopted daughter of the deceased, is the wife of P.W.1. Only one year back, P.Ws. 1 and 2 got married and in a thatched house, one portion was occupied by the deceased and the other portion was occupied by P.Ws.1 and 2. The fateful occurrence took place on 1.1.1999. On that day, P.W.1 went to work, where he was having handloom business. He came back for his lunch. At that time, at 2.30 p.m., he saw the accused Elumalai entering into varandah at the house of the deceased. In the meantime, he called P.W.2, Indira his wife and both were watching the movements of the accused/appellant. At the time, the deceased was sleeping inside the kitchen. The accused/appellant was found carrying something hidden in his dhoti and was entering into the kitchen, where the deceased was sleeping. Then the accused removed M.O.1 knife from his hidden dhoti and began to attack the deceased, causing injuries on the various parts of the body. P.Ws.1 and 2, on seeing the occurrence, tired to go near the accused, but the accused threatened them not to come near. Then, the accused ran away from the place of occurrence. Then the accused removed M.O.1 knife from his hidden dhoti and began to attack the deceased, causing injuries on the various parts of the body. P.Ws.1 and 2, on seeing the occurrence, tired to go near the accused, but the accused threatened them not to come near. Then, the accused ran away from the place of occurrence. P.W.3 Kumar, neighbour, on hearing the noise, came to the house of the deceased and found that the accused/appellant was running away from the scene with knife. At that time, the deceased was alive gasping for life. Then, immediately, P.W.3 arranged for an auto and the deceased was taken to hospital by P.W.4, auto driver. When he was about to reach the hospital, she died and therefore, the body was brought back home. P.Ws.1 and 3 went to police station and gave Ex.P.1 complaint to P.W.9 Sub Inspector of Police and a case was registered against the accused/appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 449 and 302 I.P.C. P.W.12, the Inspector of Police, on receipt of the information, took up investigation and went to the scene of occurrence; prepared Observation Mahazaar Ex.P.16; prepared rough sketch Ex.P.15. He observed all the formalities. P.W.12 thereafter conducted inquest over the body of the deceased and prepared Ex.P.9 Inquest Report. After inquest report, he sent the body to the Government Hospital for conducting post mortem alongwith Ex.P.12 requisition letter. 3. P.W.11, the Doctor, attached to the Government Hospital, on receipt of the Ex.P.12 requisition, commenced post mortem and found the following injuries: "1. Gaping 6 x 1 x 1 cm cut wound on the top of right shoulder. The lower angle lies 7 cms above the right axillary pit; Margins – clean but; Angle acute with bevelling on the upper angle. 2. 1.5 cm above the injury No.1 another 11 x 3 cms joint deep cut wound seen extending from 5 cms outer to lower border of the neck and 27 cms above the back of right elbow joint. Angles sharply cut with tailing over its lower angle for one cm. O/D, it was clean-out (Injuries 1 and 2) the soft tissues, muscles,vessels of right shoulder joint and produced a penetrating cut wound over the right shoulder joint bones, reddish in colour. 3. Angles sharply cut with tailing over its lower angle for one cm. O/D, it was clean-out (Injuries 1 and 2) the soft tissues, muscles,vessels of right shoulder joint and produced a penetrating cut wound over the right shoulder joint bones, reddish in colour. 3. 2 cms below and lower to the above wound No.(2) Gaping 4 x 1 x 1 cm incised cut wound seen with both angles acute margins clean cut. The outer lower angle shows an intermittent tailing for 7 cms obliquely and downwards. 4. 4 cms below and outer to right ear lobe and posterior hair margin, an oblique 7 x 1.5 x 4 cms deep cut wound seen with lower angle showing a tailing of 2 cms. Margins – clean cut; Angles :accute; 5. 1 cm below the above injury No.4 Gaping 7 x 3 cm x cervical bone deep(4cms), oblique cut wound seen. Margins and angles – acute; and clean cut. O/D of the wounds No.4&5 it has cut through and through the 2nd and 3rd cervical vertebrae over its outer and lateral aspect for 4 cms depth obliquely. The vessels, nerves, muscles and soft tissues close to above injuries, found clean-cut and severed. O/D Vault, Base, Dura: Intact surface vessels Pale Brain-NAD. Heart: Intact c/s Empty NAD. Lungs: Intact, NAD C/S.PAle. Hypoid Bone: Intact. Stomach: contained 100 gms of partly digested food materials with nil pungent odour. Mucosa; pale. All other internal organs intact, NAD C/S Pale: Bladder: Empty. Uterus: Empty. Viscera preserved. Blood in filter paper for Grouping. 4. The doctor opined that the deceased died of "Shock and Haemorrhage due to multiple injuries to the region of right side neck and right shoulder". 4. Then, P.W.12, on 2.1.99 arrested the accused/appellant and on his confession, M.O.1 knife was recovered. Since the accused/appellant sustained injuries, while escaping from the house of the deceased, by falling down at the ground, he was sent to the hospital for treatment. Then, the material objects were sent for chemical examination. After investigation, P.W.13 filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Secs.449 and 302 I.P.C. 5. Since the accused/appellant sustained injuries, while escaping from the house of the deceased, by falling down at the ground, he was sent to the hospital for treatment. Then, the material objects were sent for chemical examination. After investigation, P.W.13 filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Secs.449 and 302 I.P.C. 5. After the examination of the witnesses on the side of the prosecution was over, on the side of defence, D.W.1 was examined and the accused was questioned under Sec.313 Cr.P.C to explain the incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence against him and the accused denied his complicity in the crime. 6. The trial Court, after recording the evidence, came to the conclusion that the prosecution has established the case beyond reasonable doubt and convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Secs.449 and 302 I.P.C. 7. Mr. K.S. Rajagopalan, learned counsel for the accused/appellant would take us through the entire evidence and contended that P.W.1 eyewitness could not have seen the occurrence, as he has not established by producing sufficient material to show that he was living in the house, where the deceased was staying. He would also point out several infirmities in the other materials and contended that the prosecution has not established the case on these aspects. 8. We heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 9. The main point urged by the learned counsel for the accused/appellant is that there is no acceptable evidence to show that P.Ws.1 and 2 were living as husband and wife in the house, where the deceased was done to death. As a matter of fact, a suggestion has been putforth that P.W.1 did not marry P.W.2, Indira. On the other hand he was having illicit intimacy with the deceased, but the suggestion has been emphatically denied by P.Ws.1 and 2. On the other hand, the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, with reference to their relationship, has been spoken to in Ex.P.1 complaint, given by P.W.1 as well as in their evidence. Merely because the ration card has not been obtained, it cannot be contended that P.Ws.1 an 2 did not reside in their place. On the other hand, the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 has been sufficiently corroborated by the evidence of P.W.3 neighbour. Merely because the ration card has not been obtained, it cannot be contended that P.Ws.1 an 2 did not reside in their place. On the other hand, the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 has been sufficiently corroborated by the evidence of P.W.3 neighbour. P.W.3 would state that he was sitting in the house and when he heard the noise from the house of the deceased, he went and saw that the accused running away from the occurrence and P.Ws.1 and 2 were found near the deceased, who was gasping for life. According to P.W.3, he only arranged auto to take the victim and after death, the body was brought back home. So the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, in our view, have been sufficiently corroborated by P.W.3. Further, the medical evidence, adduced by P.W.11 Doctor, would indicate that the deceased died on account of five serious injuries on the vital parts of the body and those injuries caused her death. It is clear that the ocular testimony of P.Ws.1 and 2 has been sufficiently corroborated by the medical evidence adduced by P.W.11 Doctor. As a matter of fact, P.W.12 Inspector of Police, in his chief examination would state that when the accused was arrested, he was found with injuries and those injuries were at the time of escaping from the scene of occurrence after committing murder and he was sent to the hospital and got him treated. It is true that Accident Register issued by Doctor has not been produced, but it would not affect the core of the prosecution case. It is not the case of the prosecution that the accused sustained injuries during the course of occurrence. Therefore, non-production of Accident Register relating to the injuries of the accused would not in any way help the defence. As a matter of fact, D.W.1 examined on behalf of the accused would state that he is a close friend of the accused and eventhough his house is situate near by and though he stated that P.Ws 1 and 2 are not residing with the deceased, he was not able to say when the deceased died. So this statement or evidence adduced by D.W.1 would not be relied upon to reject the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2. 10. We find no merit in this appeal and therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed. So this statement or evidence adduced by D.W.1 would not be relied upon to reject the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2. 10. We find no merit in this appeal and therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed. The respondents are directed to secure the accused/appellant to undergo the unavailed period of sentence.