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

2009 Supreme(SC) 1726

J.M.PANCHAL, HARJIT SINGH BEDI
SIVANMOORTHY – Appellant
Versus
STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE – Respondent


ORDER

1. The facts leading to these appeals are as under: On 28th October, 2001, at 8.00 p.m. accused A.1 to A.8 armed with sickles (aruvals) and accused 9 to 15 armed with sticks went to the house of the deceased Seeniappa Nadar and inquired about PW.13 Mariappan, his son. The deceased informed the accused that Mariappan was not present in the house. Annoyed at this answer A.13 Ayyanar Nadar instigated the other accused and all of them attacked the deceased with their weapons killing him on the spot.

2. As per the prosecution story the motive for the incident was the serious animosity between Mariappan Nadar PW.13 on the one hand, and A.13 Ayyanar Nadar accused on the other with regard to the affairs of the Nadar community inasmuch that they represented two different groups in the Committee run by the community. It also appears from the record that even prior to this incident, several incidents had taken place between the parties with complaints inter se, not only in court but even in the police station.

3. The incident in question was witnessed by Sornammal, the wife of the deceased, her daughter P.Chellam (PW.1) who was living in a house about 100 yards away and Muthu (PW.2) the









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top