Back
2004(1) Crimes 141 (SC)
Supreme Court of India
(From Madras High Court)
N. Santosh Hegde & B.P. Singh, JJ.
State of Tamil Nadu —Appellant
versus
Sundar —Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 406 of 1997
Decided on 11-12-2003
For the Appellant :A.T.M. Rangaramanujam, Sr. Advocate, P.N. Ramalingam and Ms. T.S. Shanthi, Advocates.
For the Respondent:J.P. Dhanda and N.K. Aggarwal, Advocate (A.C.).
Important point
Reversing judgment of High Court on reappreciation of evidence will not be interfered unless said finding of High Court was either arbitrary or perverse.
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 302—Accused respondent working as extra departmental mail carrier was convicted by trial Court for murder of Incharge Sub-Post Master—Case was based on circumstantial evidence—High Court set aside conviction holding that prosecution evidence in support of circumstances could not be said to have proved those circumstances beyond doubt—Appeal—Scope for interference only if findings of High Court was either arbitrary or perverse—Reasoning of High Court in rejecting evidence could not be said to be either perverse or unacceptable—Material contradiction in evidence—Recovery of blood stained shirt of accused at his instance also appeared doubtful—Non-examination of independent witness from whose shop stolen articles were alleged to have been recovered at instance of accused was against prosecution—No interference was called for. (Para 5)
Result : Appeal dismissed.
Judgment
Santosh Hegde, J.—Respondent herein was convicted by the Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri Division at Krishnagiri for an offence punishable under section 302 IPC and was awarded the extreme penalty of death. In a reference made by the learned Sessions Judge for confirmation of the said sentence and also in an appeal filed by the respondent against the said conviction and sentence, the High Court of Judicature at Madras by the impugned judgment while dismissing the reference for confirmation of the sentence, allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge. The State of Tamil Nadu is in appeal against the said common judgment of the High Court.
2. The allegation against the respondent in this case is that he committed the murder of one D. Rathinam who was the Incharge Sub-Post Master of K.R.P. Dam Post Office on 16.3.1984 with a view to wreak vengeance against him for having accused him of stealing Rs. 10 and also with a view to rob the Post Office. It is the case of the prosecution that at the relevant time the respondent was working temporarily as an extra departmental mail carrier in place of his father who was on leave. The prosecution alleged that since the Post Office was found locked on a working day namely on 16.3.1984, PW-4 who was also working in the said Post Office, informed PW-1 who was then the Sub-Divisional Post Inspector about this locking of the Post Office who, in turn, informed PW-6, the Deputy Superintendent of Post Office over the phone as to this unusual incident of finding the Post Office locked on a working day. On instructions from PW-6, PW-1 made necessary arrangements to safeguard and protect the properties of the said Post Office and on the morning of 17.3.1984 said PW-1 went to the Post Office and broke open the lock in the presence of the Village Administrative Officer and other office personnel and on taking an inventory of the said office, they found certain cash, postal stamps, postal orders and cash certificates etc. valued at Rs. 850.55 missing. They also found Rathinam who was the Incharge of the office on 16.3.1984 missing but found his shoes in the Post Office, hence on a suspicion they searched for him during which process they found the body of said Rathinam inside the septic tank situated in the backyard of the said Post Office. On lodging a complaint in this regard, a case was registered in Taluk Police Station, Krishnagiri being Crime No. 142 of 1984 under sections 302 and 380 IPC. PW-12 who took up the investigation, came to the spot on 17.3.1984 and inspected the scene of occurrence and drew up the inquest Panchnama Ex. P-19. He made inquiries during the said inquest proceedings and recorded the statements of PWs 1, 3, 6 and one Rajan. He made arrangement to sent the dead body for autopsy. As per the medical report it was found that the deceased died due to injuries suffered by him on his head also due to asphyxia. It is the further case of the prosecution that on 18.3.1984 at about 5 a.m. PW-2 arrested the respondent near the river-bed adjacent to Kaveripattinam Travellers’ bungalow and on a disclosure statement made by the accused in the presence of PW-8, he recovered MO-28, a blood stained shirt belonging to respondent kept concealed in the river-bed. He also recovered a bunch of keys belonging to the Post Office at the instance of the respondent, kept in a post-box kept in front of a textile shop. On a further statement made by the respondent the I.O. recovered MO-13 a yellow bag from a cycle shop of one Pattu (not examined) in which he found various properties like the inland letters, postcards, postal stamps, revenue stamps etc. allegedly stolen by the respondent. On a further statement made by the respondent he also recovered certain sums of money kept concealed under a hill as also a blood stained towel kept concealed under a tree in the backyard of the Post Office. From the statement of PW-3, the I.O. found out that on 16.3.1984 in the afterno
