Judgment :- V. PERIYA KARUPPIAH, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.1), Chengalput in S.C.No.237 of 2005 dated 03.06.2005 directing the accused to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C., and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. 2. The case of the prosecution was that on 11.05.2005 at about 1.30 a.m., at Kakkan Street, Tambaram, the accused had, with an intention to cause death of the deceased Ramesh when the said Ramesh was sleeping in front of Rasi Ice Company, with a wooden log hit at the head of the said Ramesh continuously and caused injuries on his head and neck and due to the said injuries, the said Ramesh succumbed to death. Therefore, the accused was charged for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. 3. The case of the prosecution as spoken to by the prosecution witnesses are as follows:- The prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 14 and had produced Exs.P.1 to P.18 and M.Os 1 to 11, in order to substantiate its case. P.W.1 is the complainant. He resides at Krishna Nagar, Mudichur Road, West Tambaram. He would state that he is the owner of the Rasi Ice Company situated at Kakkan Street, Tambaram. He was running the said company for the past 15 years and 10 employees were working under his control and Irudhayaraj the accused, and Ramesh-the deceased, were also working under his control. The said employees used to but ice from P.W.1 sell it and return the money in the evening, which is the routine one. He would depose in his evidence that the accused and the deceased would often drink liquor and quarrel between them. On 10.05.2005, both the accused and the deceased went to the Chitra Pournami festival which was celebrated by the Nadar Sangam and thereafter, the deceased Ramesh scolded about the Nadar community in a filthy language. As the accused also belongs to the said community, he questioned the deceased and they fought with each other. When the same was brought to the notice of P.W.1, he advised both of them that warned them, if they fight with each other, he will not give work to them. Thereafter, P.W.1 changed the sleeping place of the accused to in front of medical shop. When the same was brought to the notice of P.W.1, he advised both of them that warned them, if they fight with each other, he will not give work to them. Thereafter, P.W.1 changed the sleeping place of the accused to in front of medical shop. He would further depose that when he returned to his company on 11.05.2005 at about 6.00 a.m., witnesses Ponraj and Jayakumar said that Ramesh had died due to the injuries, in front of the tyre shop. Immediately P.W.1 went to the police station and gave complaint-Ex.P.1. 4. P.W.2 is an eyewitness in this case. He would depose in his evidence that on 11.01.2005 he was sleeping in front of the Ice Company, at about 1.30 a.m., when he woke up, he saw the accused walking and going near to the deceased Ramesh and with the use ice wooden log with 13 nails, he caused injuries on the right side neck of the deceased and ran away from the place of occurrence. On seeing the occurrence, he was shocked and he also ran to the Sivananda Street. He would further depose that, when he returned to the Ice Company in the morning 6.15 a.m., it was informed by the witness Ponraj that Ramesh had died. Then he explained about the occurrence to the witness Ponraj and to P.W.1. 5. The complaint given by P.W.1 was registered by P.W.11-the Inspector of Police, Tambaram Police Station, under Crime No.633 of 2005 for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. He prepared the Express First Information Report-Ex.P.9 and immediately sent the same to the Court and to his higher officials. Thereafter, P.W.14-the Investigating Officer took the case on file in Crime No.633 of 2005 and he went to the scene of occurrence on the same day at about 8.30 p.m., and prepared observation mahazar-Ex.P.2, rough sketch-Ex.P.16, Inquest report-Ex.P.17 and directed P.W.10, the Photographer to take photographs in the presence of one Gopi-P.W.7. Further, he sent the body of the deceased to the Government Hospital for post mortem. Thereafter, he examined the witnesses and recorded their statements in the presence of Panchayatdars. P.W.14 arrested the accused on the same day at 10.45 a.m. Near Amman Koil, Durga Nagar, Cherompet. Further he recorded the confession statement of the accused. Further, he sent the body of the deceased to the Government Hospital for post mortem. Thereafter, he examined the witnesses and recorded their statements in the presence of Panchayatdars. P.W.14 arrested the accused on the same day at 10.45 a.m. Near Amman Koil, Durga Nagar, Cherompet. Further he recorded the confession statement of the accused. On the basis of the admissible portion of the confession statement of the accused-Ex.P.7 and on identification of the accused, P.W.14 recovered M.O.1–the wooden log and Mos.9 and 10. Thereafter, he remanded the accused to judicial custody. He sent M.O.1 to the Forensic Department. Finally, he completed investigation and filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. 6. When the accused was questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., he came forward with the version of total denial and stated that a false case was foisted against him. 7. The trial Court had scrutinised the evidence adduced both oral and documentary and the Material Objects and had come to the conclusion that the accused is guilty of the charge framed against him. The trial Court had after a full fledged trial, convicted the accused for an offence under Section 302 I.P.C., and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. 8. Mr. R.C. Paulkanagaraj, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the case registered by the respondent police was a peculiar one; the case has been investigated hurriedly and the charge sheet has been laid within a period of one week and the case was taken on file by the committal Court and it was committed to Sessions Court and thereafter, the Sessions Court had made over the case to the trial Court and it had framed charges as against the accused, on 27.05.2005 i.e., within a period of 16 days from the date of occurrence. The case was posted for commencement of trial on Monday i.e., on 30.05.2005 and after completion of the trial, the judgment was pronounced on 03.06.2005, i.e., within a period of 23 days from the date of occurrence. The case was posted for commencement of trial on Monday i.e., on 30.05.2005 and after completion of the trial, the judgment was pronounced on 03.06.2005, i.e., within a period of 23 days from the date of occurrence. He would further submit that the quick investigation and disposal of the case would be very much welcomed not only by the Advocate but also by the public at large but at the same time, the rights of the accused should not be shattered in any way by the said quick disposal. He would further submit that shortening of investigation would lead to incriminate an innocent person in the place of the real culprit and in this case also the accused being an innocent person was roped in this case in order to leave out the real culprit. He had also submitted that the hurried investigation and the hurried trial conducted by the trial Court had affected the rights of the accused in conducting the trial also after obtaining the legal assistance for his defence and the investigation done by the police in a hurried manner had also ended up wrongly in foisting the case on the accused. 9. He would further submit that the trial Court had rested its judgment purely on the last scene theory and other circumstantial evidence coupled with the interested testimony of P.W.2 and therefore, the judgment of the trial Court ought to have been set aside. He had also submitted that the cloths of the accused were said to have been seized with blood stains whereas the evidence for recovery of the said cloths does not speak about the blood stains in the cloths. Therefore, the cloths of the accused should have been contaminated with the blood of the deceased so as to incriminate the accused in the alleged crime. The investigating agency had completed the investigation without full details and therefore, the trial also ended against the accused which is unsustainable in law. He would plead that the over all circumstances would lead to presume that the accused is an innocent person and the benefit of doubt ought to have been given to the accused. Therefore, he prayed for setting aside the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court and to acquit the accused by allowing the appeal. 10. Mr. He would plead that the over all circumstances would lead to presume that the accused is an innocent person and the benefit of doubt ought to have been given to the accused. Therefore, he prayed for setting aside the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court and to acquit the accused by allowing the appeal. 10. Mr. V.R. Balasubramanian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the trial Court had, after a full fledged trial, convinced of the accused committing the murder of his colleague due to previous enmity between them on the fateful day at about 1.30a.m and the evidence adduced by the prosecution had proved the presence of the accused with the deceased on the fateful day and the eye witness who was examined as P.W.3 had seen the occurrence in which the deceased was hit by one person with wooden log and therefore, the ocular evidence was corroborated by the circumstantial evidence. He would further submit that the seizure of the wooden log after the arrest of the accused and the mahazar prepared thereon would disclose the involvement of the accused in the crime and the chemical examination of the blood contained cloths of the accused and the cloths of the deceased also tallied with each other and therefore, the guilt of the accused was proved by the prosecution and therefore, the appeal may be dismissed. 11. We have given our anxious thoughts to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 12. The prosecution had examined P.Ws.1 to 14 and had produced Exs.P.1 to P.18 and M.Os.1 to 10 in support of its case. Among those witnesses, P.W.1 is the complainant; P.W.2-an Employee of P.W.1 was working as “Saraku Master”; P.W.3 is an Auto Driver who is said to be the eye witness; P.W.4 is the brother of the deceased and P.W.5 is the owner of the tyre shop situated at Kakkan Street, Tambaram. 13. P.W.5 had explained in his evidence that the deceased Ramesh and the accused used to drink alchochal in the night and on 05.05.2005 they had also indulged in quarrelling. P.W.6 would speak to the effect that the deceased was sleeping on 10.05.2005 in front of the tyre shop and the accused was sleeping in front of the nearby medical shop. P.W.5 had explained in his evidence that the deceased Ramesh and the accused used to drink alchochal in the night and on 05.05.2005 they had also indulged in quarrelling. P.W.6 would speak to the effect that the deceased was sleeping on 10.05.2005 in front of the tyre shop and the accused was sleeping in front of the nearby medical shop. The accused was said to have been arrested on 12.05.2005 at 1.00 a.m., and he had given a confession statement in the presence of P.W.9 and had taken the Investigating Officer and others to a shop opposite to Canara Bank, Tambaram and had discovered a weapon-wooden log used for a ice manufacturing-M.O.1 and had also produced his blood stained full hand shirt and lungi. P.W.9’s evidence would also disclose the same. P.W.12 is the Scientific Officer of Forensic Science Department who had examined the shirt belonging to the accused and the wooden log contained the blood group ”A” which is the blood group of the deceased. 14. Now we have to see whether the investigation done in a very shortest period had any impact on the case of the prosecution and the accused is entitled for the benefit of doubt thereon. The accused and the deceased were working under P.W.1, producer of ice and the accused and the deceased used to get ice from him and sell the same and return the money in the evening to P.W.1 and it was also regularly followed by the deceased and after that he would sleep in the opposite side of the ice company where they were working and on the fateful day, the accused and the deceased were seen together talking in an inebriated condition and the accused had come to P.W.1 and told him that the deceased was scolding about their Nadar community and therefore, the deceased may not be given with any work in P.W.1’s Ice Company. We could see through the evidence of P.W.1 that he had advised them and asked the accused to go and sleep in a different place and the deceased to sleep in front of the tyre shop. We could see through the evidence of P.W.1 that he had advised them and asked the accused to go and sleep in a different place and the deceased to sleep in front of the tyre shop. The evidence of P.W.2, who is the Manager of P.W.1’s company, would also go to show that both the accused and the deceased were working under P.W.1 and they used to quarrel and thereafter take the ice box from P.W.1’s company and sell them and return the money either to P.W.1 or to him. P.W.2 had also spoken to the effect that in the morning he saw the deceased dead in the place where he was sleeping and he informed the same to his boss, P.W.1. On the basis of the information given by P.W.2, P.W.1 had given a complaint-Ex.P.1 which contains full of hearsay. 15. In these background, we have to see as to whether the non giving of complaint by P.W.2 himself to the police would help the accused to draw benefit of doubt. No doubt, P.W.2 had seen the body of the deceased by 6.00 a.m., and he did not chose to give complaint. He had informed P.W.1 who in turn had given the complaint. The said circumstance would go to show some doubt as to the complaint preferred by P.W.1 who is the hearsay witness. The suggestion of the accused is that it is only P.W.2 who had committed the murder and the police had foisted the case only against the accused leaving the real culprit. 16. Apart from that, the weapon-recovered as M.O.1 is a wooden log contains 19 nails protruding at its end. The said weapon was used in the alleged occurrence according to the prosecution case. The injury caused on the body of the deceased was spoken to by P.W.13, the post mortem Doctor and the certificate containing the details of ante mortem injuries was produced as Ex.p.15. On a careful perusal of the evidence of the Doctor and Ex.P.15 we could see that there were 7 injuries found on the body of the deceased and except 4 and 5 injuries, all other injuries were either contusion or laceration or abrasion found on the body of the deceased. On a careful perusal of the evidence of the Doctor and Ex.P.15 we could see that there were 7 injuries found on the body of the deceased and except 4 and 5 injuries, all other injuries were either contusion or laceration or abrasion found on the body of the deceased. The use of the said weapon-M.O.1 should have caused the injuries on the body of the deceased with punctured injuries since the nails found in the wooden log would certainly hit the body of the deceased and when it hit against a person it would cause such type of injuries only. Therefore, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the incident did not occur as spoken to by the prosecution witnesses and the injuries sustained by the deceased, had raised serious doubts over the involvement of the accused in this case, cannot be simply set aside. 17. The date of alleged occurrence is on 11.05.2005 at 1.30,a.m. The case was registered on the complaint, made by P.W.1 in the morning by 8.00 a.m., on the information from P.W.2, and the accused was arrested on 12.05.2005 by 11.00 a.m and a confession was recorded which lead to recovery of the wooden log containing 13 nails protruding and his lungi and shirt with blood stains, under Ex.P.8. Immediately, blood stained weapon and the clothes were sent for chemical examination and the said reports were submitted by the Scientific Officer by 20.05.2005 itself. As a whole, the investigation was over on 20.05.2005 and the charge sheet has been laid within a period of nine days from the date of occurrence and the case was taken cognizance by the committal Court, Tambaram and immediately he was committed and the Sessions Court had taken the case on file in S.C.NO.237 of 2005 and was made over to Additional District Judge, within a period of one week and the charges were framed even on the first instance and in the next working day, i.e., on 30.05.2005, the evidence was recorded and judgment was pronounced on 03.06.2005. 18. Therefore, we could see that the investigation was over within a period of 9 days. 18. Therefore, we could see that the investigation was over within a period of 9 days. The suggestion put forth to P.W.2 by the defence that he had hit the deceased on his head with M.O.1 and it was noted down by one Ponraj and in order to safeguard P.W.2 as he is the only Master of the Ice company, P.W.1 had given the complaint against the accused contrary to the truth gains importance. The prosecution has not examined the important witness-ponraj who is also said to have been working at the Ice Company of P.W.1. It is also spoken to by P.W.2 that Ponraj also told about the incident to P.W.1. Therefore, we could see that the alleged eye witness-P.W.2 had not informed the incident to the police immediately on seeking the commission of murder of the deceased by the accused nor had he given any complaint in the morning after he met Ponraj who had verified the death of the deceased and told to P.W.1. The non giving complaint by P.W.2 is now belonging to a highly suspicious factor. 19. Similarly, as per evidence we can see number of shops in the road and they would be open till 11.00 p.m., and there was one Vidhya Theatre was also running the film-show during the relevant period. Therefore, it cannot be said that there would not be any other witnesses to be examined by the investigating Officer to come to a correct conclusion. Without examining the various witnesses in and around the vicinity of the place of occurrence, the Investigating Officer had come to the conclusion that the accused had committed the offence, in a very short period. When he had taken the case for investigation, he had grown suspicion on the accused alone and why the investigating officer had not suspected as to why P.W.2 who is the actual eye witness had not given any complaint to the police. There is no explanation as to why the complaint has been lodged by P.W.1 who is not an eyewitness but a hearsay witness. It is not out of place to mention that P.W.1 had spoken in his evidence that the accused and the deceased were his employees who used to get ice for their iceboxes and sold them and in the evening they would come and pay the money. It is not out of place to mention that P.W.1 had spoken in his evidence that the accused and the deceased were his employees who used to get ice for their iceboxes and sold them and in the evening they would come and pay the money. Therefore, his evidence has not shown any enmity between accused and the deceased. The motive for committing the offence against the deceased was the abuse of the ‘Nadar community’ by the deceased when the accused had spoken about the ‘Chitra Pournami’ festival conducted by Nadar Sangam, Tambaram. The said enmity was not spoken to by any other witnesses except the hearsay witness P.W.1. The alleged motive and the enmity spoken in order to commit the offence against the deceased is flimsy. No doubt P.W.1 also belongs to the same community but he has not taken any grudge against the deceased when the accused was allegedly reporting the same to P.W.1. Therefore, the motive as proposed by the prosecution lacks belief and it cannot be considered for any moment to come to a conclusion that it would be the cause for commission of murder. 20. The Serological report filed by the Scientific Officer which is said to have tallied with the blood stains found in the weapon-M.O.1 and the cloths of the accused has to be considered as to whether that would be sufficient or corroborated other evidence to sustain conviction. The argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the investigation was hurriedly done by the investigating officer which would show the interest shown by him in this case and therefore, it could be possible that the blood of the deceased collected should have been used for staining the cloths of the accused seized and to rope him in the offence cannot also be ruled out. Even if true, it is not sufficient to hold conviction on the sole report of the serologist. 21. Investigation is over by nine days and it would definitely show the interest taken by the Investigating officer to complete the investigation within a short span of time. After filing of the charge sheet, no time to react and to reflect, was given to the accused by the committal Court. Immediately the case had been committed to the Sessions Court and the Sessions Court had also not given any time to the accused to think over his defence. After filing of the charge sheet, no time to react and to reflect, was given to the accused by the committal Court. Immediately the case had been committed to the Sessions Court and the Sessions Court had also not given any time to the accused to think over his defence. The trial had commenced immediately on the next working day after the charges were framed. As per the Code of Criminal Procedure, the charges ought to have been framed after hearing both parties and the trial Court had to fix the date for summoning the witnesses and to give time for defence to prepare their case but in the case on hand, the trial courd had commenced the trial immediately after framing of the charges. 22. No doubt, the speedy justice as generated by the Constitution of India is the right of every citizen. While providing speedy justice the norms to be followed in a criminal case as stipulated for the benefit of the accused much as to give tune for reflection and also the time required for preparing his defence are to be provided. But in this case, the Investigating Officer had hurriedly done the investigation and the charge sheet has been filed under Section 302 I.P.C., against the accused within a period of nine days. In a case of murder which took place in the night, the Investigating Officer had to be very careful in determining and finding the accused. For that, there should not be any hurried investigation. On the circumstances in which P.W.2 had not given any complaint immediately on seeing the occurrence and the discrepancy in the injuries found on the deceased which are likely to be caused by the 13 pointed nails in the wooden log and the prosecution had not come out with any explanation and the flimsy motive on which the murder is said to have been committed by the accused would go a long way to show that the hurried investigation is purely detrimental to the entire case of prosecution. Therefore, the investigation cannot be termed as a speedy investigation but could only be termed as hurried investigation. The rights of the accused were denied not only during the course of investigation but also during the trial and the discrepancy in the evidence of prosecution as aforesaid would certainly give benefit of doubt to the accused. 23. Therefore, the investigation cannot be termed as a speedy investigation but could only be termed as hurried investigation. The rights of the accused were denied not only during the course of investigation but also during the trial and the discrepancy in the evidence of prosecution as aforesaid would certainly give benefit of doubt to the accused. 23. Similarly, the immediate committal and commencement of trial immediately after framing of charges are also not appreciable to be followed by a trial Court. 24. It is the cordinal principle that justice should not be delayed; the delayed justice is a denied justice. But at the same time, it is also to be born in mind that the hurried justice is a buried justice. Therefore, our Constitution had aptly said the right of a citizen is only a speedy justice. The speedy justice means the rights of the accused should not have been violated in a criminal case and at the same time, the case has to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible without any delay. In this case, the hurried investigation had caused havoc to the rights of the accused and the discrepancy in the prosecution case would go a long way to show that the benefit of doubt caused due to the hurried investigation and the discrepancies followed should be given to the accused. 25. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that benefit of doubt has to be given to the accused as the prosecution has not come forward with a genuine case with proper investigation. Therefore, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court convicting the accused for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C., and sentencing him to under go life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-and in default to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment are set aside and the criminal appeal is allowed. The bail bond, if any, executed by him shall stand terminated.