Back
Judges : KOSHI,VITHAYATHIL
Velayudha Kurup - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Case No : Crl. A. No. 23, 24, 25 of 1952
Decided On : 10/20/1952
Advocates Appeared :
K. G. Kunjukrishna Pillai; G. Balagangadharan Nair; For Appellants M. N. Parameswaran Pillai; For State
Appeals - Criminal Law - Sections 304, 326 of the Indian Penal Code
Fact of the Case:
The case arose from a violent altercation between the prosecution party and the accused over the harvesting of crops from a disputed property. The altercation resulted in injuries to multiple individuals and the death of one person.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused for causing grievous hurt with deadly weapons. The court acquitted the accused of murder and convicted one of the accused under the second part of section 304, sentencing him to 7 years of rigorous imprisonment.
Issues: The main issue was whether the lower court's decision on the injuries and the guilt of the accused could be sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: The court analyzed the evidence and found that the prosecution's case was insufficient to sustain the charges of causing grievous hurt with deadly weapons. The court also determined that the accused had the right of private defence of property, but the causing of death was not justified.
Final Decision: The lower court's conviction of the accused for causing grievous hurt with deadly weapons was set aside. The accused were acquitted of murder, and one of the accused was convicted under the second part of section 304, sentenced to 7 years of rigorous imprisonment.
1. These three appeals arise from the judgment in Sessions Case No. 13 of 1951 on the file of the Trivandrum Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Judge who tried the case found accused 1, Velayudha Kurup, guilty of causing grievous hurt with a deadly weapon to P.W. 1, Krishna Pillai and he was accordingly sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 18 months Appeal 23 is against that conviction and sentence Accused 2, Sreedharan Pillai, has been found to have caused the death of P.W. 1's niece, Kunhilekshmi Amma by stabbing her with a pen-knife and also grievous hurt with the same weapon to P.W. 1. In respect of the former offence, namely, murder, he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and in respect of the latter to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 18 months. These sentences are to run concurrently. His appeal is Criminal Appeal No 24. The remaining appeal, namely, Criminal Appeal 25, has been preferred by accused 3, Madhavan Nair against his conviction and sentence for causing grievous hurt with a deadly weapon to P. W.1. The sentence against him is the same as that passed against accused 1 and 2 for causing grievous hurt with deadly weapon, namely, rigorous imprisonment for 18 months The charge against these appellants embraced several other counts, but they have been acquitted of these charges.
2. Besides Kunhilekshmi Amma and Pw.1 on the prosecution side Pws. 2,3 and 11 also sustained injuries during the course of the same occurrence. On the defence side all the three appellants sustained severe injuries. The occurrence was at about 11 A M. on 3-6-1123. Kunhilekshmi Amma died the next day [4-6-1123] at 8-45 P. M. Pw.1 sustained as many as 15 injuries and he remained an in-patient in the hospital unable to follow his ordinary avocations till 9-7-1123. Pw. 2 had eight injuries and Pw. 3 five. The former remained in the hospital as an inpatient till 23-6-1123 and the latter till 16-6-1123 Pw. 11 had only two minor injuries and she was not admitted in the hospital as an in-patient. Accused 1 sustained as many as six injuries and accused 2 and 3 eleven each. Each of these accused persons remained in the hospital as in-patients for a period of 27 days and during that period they were unable to follow their ordinary pursuits. One noteworthy feature about the injuries inflicted during the occurrence complained of is that all the injuries were of a nature which could have been caused only by sharp instruments. The injuries all except those Pw. 11 sustained were severe in character; some of them were gaping wounds and others punctured or incised ones. There was a counter case against Pws.1 to 3 and that was tried by the learned judge as Sessions Case No. 14. That case however ended in the acquittal of all the three accused persons.
3. The occurrence that gave rise to the two cases arose as a result of the attempt made by the prosecution party here to harvest the crops from a paddy field in Ooralikonath Ela in Aanad Muri, Palode Pakuthy, which together with other items were delivered over to accused 1 and his elder brother pursuant to the decree in O. S. 667 of 1104 on the file of the Nedumangad Munsiff's Court. The delivery was on 28-4-1123 and it is evidenced by the receipt Ex. Y. The said decree was one in redemption against Pw. 1. His father, one Ayyasami Iyer, had executed first a usufructuary mortgage and then a purakadom deed in his [Pw. 1's] favour in respect of the properties comprised in the decree. The mortgage (Ex. I) was in 1099 and the purakadom (Ext. II) in 1101. Some years after these documents came into being Pw. I's mother Kalliani Amma deserted Ayyasami Iyer and left for Singapore with her son by a former husband. Soon afterwards Ayyasami Iyer executed a will bequeathing all his properties to his son Mahadeva Iyer. This served as a prelude for the commencement of a series of litigation which has not seen its end even today. First Kalliani Amma and her eldest son f
AI
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
