Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Amitava Roy, JJ.
Muthuramalingam & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Represented by Inspector of Police – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 231-233, 225, 226-227, 895 of 2009 & 429 of 2015
Decided On : 09-12-2016
AIR 1960 SC 725; AIR 1959 SC 572 – Relied upon
(1971) 3 SCC 471; AIR 1956 SC 116; (2003) 2 SCC 266; (2000) 6 SCC 89; AIR 1963 SC 174 : 192 Supp (3) SCR 848; (1970) 3 SCC 46 – Referred
(b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 r/w section 149 – Accused-appellants causing death of eight persons in a barbaric and brutal manner – Also mercilessly killing a child of only 1½ years – Do not deserve any sympathy. (Para 20)
(c) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Trial court imposing life imprisonment on a number of counts and directing it to run consequently on each count – High Court affirming the same – Not permissible – Life sentences on different counts cannot rum consequently. (Para 5, 21)
Facts of the case:
A gruesome incident occurred in which the appellants, the deceased and few witnesses were related to each other.
On 10.02.1994, accused persons assembled unlawfully with deadly weapons and with the common intention to commit murder, they chased the family members of deceased Rajendran when they got down from the bus. They were coming back to their village after attending the cremation of Rajendran, who died in another case on 09.02.1994, and the appellants herein and few others were accused in that case. The accused persons, in a gruesome attack on the family members, murdered 8 persons, including a 1½ years child and one who succumbed to the injuries later in the Hospital.
All the accused were held guilty and were sentenced variously.
The High Court modified the order of the trial court and convicted A1 to A4, A6, A8 to A12 and A14 to A17 under section 148 IPC; convicted A1 to A4, A6, A8 to A12, A14 to A17 under section 302 read with Section 149 instead of 302 read with 34 IPC; Confirmed the conviction of
A1 to A4, A6, A8 to A12 and A14 to A17 under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC; and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on A5, A13, A19 and A20.
Finding of the Court:
Judgment of the High Court is justified except that life sentences on different counts cannot run consequently.
Result: Appeals disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.
1. Brief facts giving rise to the initiation of criminal proceedings in these cases are as follows:-
A gruesome incident occurred in Taluk Ramanathapuram, District Tamil Nadu in which the appellants, the deceased and few witnesses were related to each other. As per prosecution case, on 10.02.1994, accused persons assembled unlawfully with deadly weapons and with the common intention to commit murder, they chased the family members of deceased Rajendran when they got down from the bus in the village near Karisalkulam Branch Road. They were coming back to their village after attending the cremation of Rajendran, who died in another case on 09.02.1994, and the appellants herein and few others were accused in that case. The accused persons, in a gruesome attack on the family members, murdered 8 persons, including one who succumbed to the injuries later in the Hospital. PW-1 immediately after the occurrence proceeded to Kovilankulam Police Station and lodged the complaint, Ex.P1. PW-22 who was the Sub-Inspector of Police at Kovilankulam Police Station registered the case as Crime No.6 of 1994 under Sections 147, 148, 324, 307, 302 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”) and under Section 25(1) of Indian Arms Act. After completing the investigation, PW-23 filed the charge-sheet against the accused persons under Sections 147, 148, 324, 307, 506(ii), 307 & 302 read with Section 34 IPC.
2. Originally there were 21 accused persons. Accused Chandran died during the investigation. Hence, 20 accused persons (A1 to A20) were tried by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Ramanathapuram. However, accused No.7 – Murugan @ Kodarai died during the trial. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Ramanathapuram, convicted A1 to A6 and A8 to A20 each and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for various offences. A18 – Malaiyandi died during the pendency of the appeal before the High Court. The learned Additional Sessions Judge found the occurrence to be a brutal and gruesome attack by the accused persons forming unlawful assembly and causing death of eight persons, including a 1½ years child, with a common objective of eliminating everyone in the deceased’s family.
3. Learned Additional Sessions Judge delivered his judgment on 30.05.2006, holding all the accused persons guilty and sentenced them as follows:-
| ACCUSED | CONVICTION | SENTENCE |
| A-1 to A-6 & A8 to A20 | U/s 148 IPC | RI for one year |
| A-1 to A-6, A-9 to A13, & A-15 | U/s 302 r/w S.34 IPC | Imprisonment for life |
| A-8 and A-17 | U/s 302 r/w S.34 IPC (2 counts) | Imprisonment for life for each count |
| A-1 to A-6, A-9 to A-13 A-15, A-16, A-18 to A-20 | U/s 302 r/w S.149 (7 counts) | Imprisonment for life for each count |
| A-14 | U/s 302 r/w S.149 IPC (8 counts) | Imprisonment for life for each count |
| A-8 and A-17 | U/s 302 r/w S.149 IPC (6 counts) | Imprisonment for life for each count |
| A-14 and A15 | U/s 307 IPC | RI for 10 years |
| A1 to A6, A8 to A13 and A16 to A20 | U/s 307 r/w S.149 IPC | RI for 10 years |
4. Against the judgment and order dated 30.05.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, criminal appeals were preferred before Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The High Court while disposing of Criminal Appeal Nos.313, 323, 328, 406, 451 and 539 of 2006, found that there was no evidence to warrant conviction of A5, A13, A19 and A20 in the instant case. However, the High Court found all other accused guilty of eight barbaric murders and attempt to murder while forming unlawful assembly. The High Court, in paragraph 66 of its judgment, modified the conviction and sentence imposed by the lower Court as follows:-
i. “A1 to A4, A6, A8 to A12 and A14 to A17 are convicted under section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year;
ii. A1 to A4, A6, A
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
