SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 1681

2008(8) Supreme 290
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Madras High Court)
Dr. Arijit Pasayat and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.
A. Maharaja — Appellant
versus
State of Tamil Nadu — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. of 2008
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2270 of 2008)
Decided on : 14-11-2008

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant :P.V. Yogeswaran, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
Scope, ambit, applicability and ingredients of section 300 exception 4 discussed.

Headnote:(a) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 300, Exception Fourth – Scope, ambit, applicability and ingredients of section 300 exception 4 discussed. (Paras 8 and 9)

        AIR 1993 SC 2426; 2008 (11) SCALE 599 – Relied upon.

        (b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 300, Exception Fourth – Occurrence took place in course of sudden quarrel – Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC applies. (Para 11)

       Facts of the case :

        1. Alagu Ambalam (the ‘deceased’) had certain immovable properties which he partitioned 10 years before the occurrence, and he regained a piece of land for his livelihood. The accused was insisting him to give that land also. There arose a civil dispute between them. It also ended in favour of Alagu Ambalam.

        2. On the day of occurrence i.e, 26.05.2003 at about 7.00 A.M. Alagu Ambalam, was cutting Karuvela trees. He was having a spade and aruval in hand. At that time, the accused came there and questioned how he could cut the trees, and following the same, there was a wordy duel. Immediately, the accused snatched the aruval and cut him on the neck and shoulder indiscriminately. Alagu Ambalam met his instantaneous death.

        3. Trial Court recorded the conviction and sentence.

        4. The High Court did not find any substance in the plea and dismissed the appeal.

       Finding of the Court :

        Exception 4, section 300 IPC applies in the facts of the case.

       Result : Appeal partly allowed.

JUDGMENT

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —

1. Leave granted.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant for offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short ‘the IPC’) and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations, as recorded by the Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai, in S.C. No.189 of 2005.

3. The prosecution version, in a nutshell, is as follows.

PW-1 is the wife of PW-4. The accused and PW-4 are the sons of Alagu Ambalam (hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’). PW-2 is the son of PW-1. Alagu Ambalam had certain immovable properties which he partitioned 10 years before the occurrence, and he regained a piece of land namely 10 cents, which is a poramboke, for his livelihood. The accused was insisting him to give that land also. There arose a civil dispute between them. It also ended in favour of Alagu Ambalam. On the day of occurrence i.e, 26.05.2003 at about 7.00 A.M., PW-1 was going to the garden to pluck vegetables. At that time, her father-in-law, the said Alagu Ambalam, was cutting Karuvela trees. He was having a spade and aruval in hand. At that time, the accused came there and questioned how he could cut the trees, and following the same, there was a wordy duel. Immediately, the accused snatched the aruval and cut him on the neck and shoulder indiscriminately. PW-1 on seeing this, raised alarm, and immediately, the accused fled away from the place of occurrence. The said Alagu Ambalam met his instantaneous death. PW-1 proceeded to the Police Station, where, the sub-Inspector of Police (PW-11), was present. PW-1 gave a report (Ex.P1), on the strength of which a case came to be registered in Crime No.81/2003 under Section 302 IPC. The first information report, Ex.P-12, along with Ex.P1 was despatched to the Magistrates’ Court.

The Inspector of Police (PW-12), on receipt of the copy of the FIR, took up investigation, proceeded to the spot, made an inspection in the presence of witnesses and prepared an observation mahazar, Ex.P-4, and a rough sketch, Ex.P-13. Then, he conducted inquest on the dead body of Alagu Ambalam in the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared an inquest report, Ex.P-14. The dead body was sent to the Government Hospital along with a requisition, Ex.P-2, for the purpose of autopsy.

The Assistant Surgeon (PW-6), attached to the Government Hospital, Melur, on receipt of the said requisition, conducted autopsy on the dead body of Alagu Ambalam and found 7 cut injuries. The doctor gave a post-mortem certificate, Ex.P-3, with her opinion that the deceased would appear to have died of hemorrhage and shock due to injuries to major vessels.

Pending the investigation, the Investigating Officer arrested the accused on 27.05.2003. He volunteered to give a confessional statement, which was recorded by the Investigator. The admissible part of the confession was marked as Ex. P-6, pursuant to which he produced M.O.-1, aruval and M.O.-4, Shirt, which have been recovered under a mahazar, Ex.P-7. The accused was sent for judicial remand. All the material objects recovered from the place of occurrence and from the dead body and M.Os. l and 4, recovered from the accused, were subjected to chemical analysis by the Forensic Sciences Department, which resulted in two reports namely Ex.P-10, the Chemical Analyst’s report and Ex.P-11, the Serologist’s report.

On completion of investigation, the Investigator filed the final report. Charges were framed. The accused pleaded innocence.

Twelve witnesses were examined to further the prosecution version. The accused, in his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 (in short ‘the Code’) submitted that he has been falsely implicated and in any event, there was a wordy duel before the occurrence in which the appellant had purportedly snatched the weapon from the










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top