Back
2005 Supreme(Mad) 209
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. D. DINAKARAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. ASHOK KUMAR
Murugan S/o.Chellam Mupper - Appellant
Versus
State, through, Inspector of Police - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.467 of 2002
Decided On : 07 February 2005
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the benefit of doubt should be given to the accused in case of uncertainty or suspicion.
Headnote:
Motive - Matricide - Section 302 I.P.C. - The court discussed the evidence related to the motive for the occurrence, the suspicious circumstances of the injuries sustained by the deceased, and the delay in lodging the complaint. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and acquitted the appellant based on the benefit of doubt.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant appealed against the judgment convicting him under Sections 302 I.P.C. for causing the death of his mother. The prosecution alleged that the appellant attacked his mother with a wooden beater, resulting in her death.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence related to the motive, circumstances of the injuries, and the delay in lodging the complaint raised serious doubts about the prosecution's case. The court concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Issues: The issues revolved around the motive for the occurrence, the circumstances of the injuries sustained by the deceased, and the delay in lodging the complaint.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in lodging the complaint, the suspicious circumstances of the injuries, and the contradictory evidence regarding the motive raised serious doubts about the prosecution's case, leading to the acquittal of the appellant.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant, and acquitted him from the charges.
(Appeal under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.III), Madurai, in S.C.No.500 of 2001, dated 05.02.2002.)
S. Ashok Kumar, J.
The appellant, the sole accused in Sessions Case No.500 of 2001 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.III), Madurai, has filed this appeal against the judgment, dated 05.02.2002, convicting him under Sections 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment for the said offence and also to pay a sum of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo further imprisonment for six months.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
(a) It is a case of matricide. The deceased is none other than the mother of the accused. The deceased left her husband i.e. the father of the accused, two years prior to the occurrence and came to reside with P.W.1. P.W.1 had already two wives and both of them deserted him. Six days prior to the occurrence i.e. 04.06.2001, the accused came to the house of P.W.1 and stayed with them. According to P.W.1, he picked-up a quarrel with the deceased on 04.06.2001 because he did not like the deceased to be with him and during the quarrel he took a wooden beater and attacked the deceased on her head voluntarily three times. The deceased suffered serious head injuries and she was taken to Government Rajaji Hospital at Madurai, at 11.15 a.m. by P.W.4. On 06.06.2001 at 7.45 p.m., the injured died.
(b) Thereafter, on 08.06.2001, at 6.30 a.m., P.W.1 gave a complaint in the police station before P.W.10 Sub-Inspector of Police of Vikkiramangalam Police Station, who registered case in Crime No.62 of 2001 under Section 302 I.P.C. and prepared Ex.P-10 printed FIR and despatched the same to the Court and the copies to the higher authorities.
(c) P.W.13 Inspector of Police, on receipt of copy of Ex.P-10 FIR at 7.30 a.m. on 08.06.2001, took up the investigation, visited the scene of occurrence, made an observation and prepared Ex.P-2 observation mahazar in the presence of witnesses. He also drew Ex.P-3 rough sketch. Then he proceeded to the Government Hospital at Madurai and there he enquired some witnesses and recorded their statements. Thereafter, from 10.15 a.m. to 12.30 p.m., he conducted inquest on the body of the deceased in the presence of panchayatdars and prepared Ex.P-13 inquest report and on completion of inquest, he sent the body for postmortem.
(d) P.W.11 Dr.Natarajan, attached to Madurai Medical College Hospital, on receipt of requisition from the Investigation Officer, conducted postmortem on 08.06.2001 and found the following injuries.
"1.Sutured lacerated wound 1 cm x 05 cm x bone deep seen on the left frontal region – 4 cm above from left eye brow.
2.Sutured lacerated wound 1 cm x .5cm x bone deep seen on right parietal region 10 cm above the right ear.
3.Sutured lacerated wound 6 cm x 1cm x bone deep seen on right occipital region (10 cm away from right ear).
Abrasions: Front of left knee 7 cm x 1 cm; Back of middle of right forearm 2 cm x 1 cm.
On dissection of scalp, skull and dura:
Contusion of scalp 7 cm x 4 cm on left front -parietal region and 10 cm x 8 cm on right parietal region and 12 cm x 10 cm on occipital region. Extra dural haemotoma about 30 grams seen on right occipital lobe and subdural haematoma about 30 grams seen on left frontal lobe. Laceration of brain 2 cm x 1.5 cm x 1 cm on the left frontal lobe with intracerebral haemorrhage noted. Cerebrospinal fluid increased and blood stained. Fracture of posterior cranial fossa of base of skull on both sides noted obliquely.
Other findings:
Peritoneal and pleural cavities – empty; Pericardium-15ml of straw colour fluid; Heart-right side - fluid blood, left side - empty; Lungs-cut section-congested; Hyoid bone-intact; Stomach-contains 100ml of brown colour fluid, nil specific smell. Mucosa-normal; Liver, Spleen and Kidneys-cut section-congested; Small intestine-contains 20 ml of bile stained fluid, nil
