Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.M. SAHAI AND Dr. A.S. ANAND, JJ.
Nadodi Jayaraman etc., Appellants
Versus
State of T.N., Respondent.
Criminal Appeals Nos. 66-67 of 1978
Decided on 28-4-1992.
Advocates appeared
Mr. N.T. Vanamamalai and Mr. R.K. Garg, Sr. Advocates, Mr. V.J. Francis, Mr. A. Sasidharan and Mr. V. Subramaniam, Advocates with them, for Appellants; Mr. K.V. Venkataraman and Mr. K.V. Viswanathan, Advocates, for Respondent.
# Criminal Appeal No. 209 of 1975
Decided on 15-9-1976 (Mad.).
(ii) Maxim falsus in uno falsus in omnibus - Cannot be mechanically applied - Mere fact that the evidence of some of the prosecution witnesses was found unsafe for convicting the co-accused, is by itself no ground for rejecting the whole body of their testimony - It only puts the Court on its guard to carefully scrutinise their evidence.
(Para 10)
(iii) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302/34 and 304 Part II - Conviction u/s. 302/34 - Appeal- Trade Union rivalry - Eye witnesses- The deceased died on account of the injuries received by him in the occurrence Injuries were caused not only by appellants A2 and A3 but by all the other accused also, who stand acquitted - According to the medical evidence the deceased had died due to shock and haemorrhage on account of multiple injuries - Except injury 22, all the injuries caused were simple and on non-vital parts of the body - Appellants do not appear to have had the intention of causing the death of the deceased or even causing such bodily injury as was likely to cause death - They can at the best be attributed with the knowledge that their act was likely to cause death - Conviction u/s. 302/ 34 not sustainable. (Paras 13 & 14)
(iv) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304, Part II - Trade Union rivalry - Deceased died because of multiple injuries caused - Five of the co-accused stand acquitted - State not filing appeal against acquittal - Common intention to cause death not established - Evidence on record does not lead to the conclusion that appellants A2 and A3 alone caused all the injuries to the deceased with the intention to cause his death - The appellants can be held guilty of committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder - The offence would full u/s. 304, Part II of the Code - Each of the appellants is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for the period already undergone by them. (Para) ?
Held: The occurrence look place almost two decades ago, on 15th June, 1972. The appellants faced the trial and were convicted by the learned Sessions Judge vide Judgment dated 29th March, 1975 and thereafter their appeal against conviction and sentence remained pending and was dismissed by the High Court on 15th September, 1976. Special leave was granted on ISl February 1978, and on 28th November,. 1978, the appellants were directed to be released on bail vide this Courts order made in Criminal Misc. Petition No. 2495 of 1978. On behalf of the appellants, we were informed that as under-trial prisoners and during the trial and on conviction, each of the appellants had suffered imprisonment for more than five years. In our opinion, therefore, it is not now desirable to send the appellants back to jail after they have been on bail also for more then a decade and during this period, nothing has been brought to our notice to show that they had indulged in any criminal activity. Therefore, while convicting them for the offence under Section 304, Pan II, I.P.C., we sentence each of the appellants to suffer rigorous imprisonment for the period already undergone by them. (Para 15)
JUDGMENT
Dr. A. S. ANAND, J.:—Trade union rivalry and fight for leadership, power and influence in the trade union, claimed the life of Prathab Chandran on 15th of June 1972 at the Simpson Plant, Sembium. For the said murder of Prathab Chandran, Ex-Vice-President of the Peravai Workers Union, seven accused were arrayed on seven charges and tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Madras Division who vide judgment dated 29th March 1975 acquitted all the accused of the charge of criminal conspiracy under S. 120B read with S. 302, IPC. All the accused other than accused No. 2 and accused No. 3 (hereinafter referred to as A-2 and A-3) were acquitted of the other charges framed against them and conviction was recorded against A2 and A-3 under S. 302 read with S. 34, IPC and each one of them was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. A-2 and A-3, namely, Nadodi Jayaraman (A-2) and Dilli Bai (A-3) filed an appeal against their conviction and sentence in the High Court of Madras. A Division Bench of that Court, vide judgment dated 15th September 1976, dismissed their appeal, thereby upholding their conviction and sentence. Both A-2 and A-3 preferred special leave petitions (Crl.) in this Court and on 1st February 1978, special leave was granted. Hence these appeals.
2. Before proceeding, further, it would be relevant to note that both the appellants, A-2 and A-3, along with five acquitted co-accused, A-1, A-4, A-5, A-6 and A-7, had been charged firstly, for criminal conspiracy to cause the murder of Prathab Chandran, punishable under S. 120B read with S. 302, IPC and secondly, for the murder of Prathab Chandran, in furtherance of common intention to kill him punishable under S. 302, read with S. 34, IPC. A-1 was charged with abatement of murder, punishable under S. 302 read with S. 109, IPC; A-4 was charged for voluntarily causing hurt to PW-19 Munuswami, punishable under S. 320 IPC, A-2, A-3 and A-6 were charged for voluntarily causing hurt to PW-21, Gopalakrishnan, in furtherance of their common intention, punishable under S. 324 read with S. 34,IPC; A-5 and A-6 were charged for voluntarily causing hurt to PW-23, Gajendra Babu in furtherance of their common intention punishable under S. 324 read with S. 34, IPC, and A-6 was charged for voluntarily causing damage to the motor-cycle of Prathab Chandran deceased, punishable under S. 435, IPC. Except for recording the conviction of A-2 and A-3 for an offence under S. 302 -read with S. 34, IPC, all other charges against the accused including A-2 and A-3 failed and since there has been no appeal against the acquittal of the co-accused of A-2 and A-3 or against A-2 and A-3 in respect of their acquittal for the other offences, we need not detain ourselves to reproduce the findings of the courts below in respect of various charges which had been framed against all the accused persons.
3. The case of the prosecution is that Simpson Group of Companies had nine factories at the relevant time. There was a labour union known as Simpson Companies Workers Union and one Kattur Gopal was its President. Prathab Chandran deceased, an inspector working in Plant III, was one of its Vice-Presidents. This Union was attached to what is called the "D.M.K. Peravai". The deceased was one of the prime promoters of the said Peravai, Kuchelar A-1 was elected as the President and Nadodi Jayaraman A-2 (one of the appellants herein) was elected the. Vice-President of the Simpson Group of Companies Workers and Staff Union. The elections had taken place by secret ballot on 27-4-1972. Madhavan A-5 and Sailam A-4 had been elected as Assistant Secretary and Executive Committee Member of the Union respectively. Amuldoss alias Devadoss, A-6, and Devarajan, A-7, were elected as group leaders. Kuchelar A-1, considered Prathab Chandran deceased as posing a serious threat to the power a and influence, hitherto exercised by him in the Labour Union Movement. This rivalry between A-1 group and Prathab Chandran group in the
SupremeToday
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
