Back
2004 Supreme(Mad) 173
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE R.BANUMATHI
Guna @ Gunasekaran & Another - Appellant
Versus
Inspector of Police & Another - Respondents
CRL.APPEAL No.759 of 1996 and Crl.R.C.No.950 of 1995
Decided On : 12 February 2004
The central legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on consistent and credible evidence, supported by medical evidence, to establish the guilt of the accused and uphold the conviction.
Headnote:
Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Section 307 IPC, Section 326 IPC, Section 324 IPC - The judgment discusses the charges framed against the accused, the findings of the trial court, and the appeal and revision arising from the conviction of A.1 and the acquittal of A.2 to A.4. The case of prosecution, the evidence of injured witnesses, and the medical evidence are analyzed. The court deliberates on the acquittal of A.2 to A.4 and the conviction of A.1 for the offenses under Section 307 IPC and Section 326 IPC. The court also considers the principles governing appeal against an order of acquittal and the guidelines for approach to such an appeal. The judgment concludes with the confirmation of the conviction and sentence of A.1 and the dismissal of the appeal and revision.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves an incident where the accused, A.1, armed with a knife, inflicted injuries on the victims, P.W.2 and P.W.4, and A.2 to A.4 were alleged to have beaten other individuals with sticks. The injured witnesses were admitted to the hospital with grievous injuries, and the accused were charged with various offenses under the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence of the injured witnesses was consistent and supported by medical evidence, leading to the conviction of A.1 for the offenses under Section 307 IPC and Section 326 IPC. The acquittal of A.2 to A.4 was upheld based on the lack of evidence supporting their involvement in the specific charges against them.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the credibility of the prosecution's case, the evidence of the injured witnesses, and the involvement of A.2 to A.4 in the alleged offenses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of considering the evidence of injured witnesses and the principles governing appeal against an order of acquittal. It also highlighted the need for substantial grounds to disturb the findings of the trial court.
Final Decision: The court confirmed the conviction and sentence of A.1 for the offenses under Section 307 IPC and Section 326 IPC, and dismissed the appeal and revision.
First Accused in S.C.No.87 of 1995 on the file of learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Madras is the Appellant in Crl.A.No.759 of 1996.
Crl.A.No.759/1996: By the judgment dated 31.10.1995, Appellant / A.1 was convicted under Ss.307 I.P.C. (two counts) and 326 I.P.C. (two counts). A.2 to A.3 were acquitted of all the charges.
Crl.R.C.No.950/1995: Injured witness P.W.2 - Thilakaraj has come forward with this revision aggrieved over the acquittal of A.2 to A.4. Respondents 2 to 4 are the acquitted Accused 2 to 4.
2. Gist of charges framed against the Accused 1 to 4 and the finding of the trial Court are as noted below:-
Charge Number Gist of the Offence Against which accused Finding 1 Section 324 I.P.C. (2 counts) for voluntarily causing hurt to P.W.4 - Arputham and P.W.2 – Thilagaraj A1 Found not guilty. Acquitted 2 Section 324 I.P.C. r/w 34 I.P.C. for sharing common intention with A1 on Charge No.1
A2 to A4 Found not guilty. Acquitted 3 Section 324 I.P.C. (2 counts) for voluntarily causing injury to P.W.3 - Manju Helen Mary A2 to A4 Found not guilty. Acquitted 4 Section 326 I.P.C. (2 counts) for voluntarily causing grievous hurt to P.W.4 - Arputham and P.W.2 - Thilagaraj with dangerous weapon
A1 Found guilty. Convicted under Section 326 I.P.C. (2 counts) No separate sentence imposed 5
Section 326 I.P.C. (2 counts) r/w 34 I.P.C. for sharing common intention with A1 on Charge No.4
A2 to A4 Found not guilty. Acquitted 6 Section 307 I.P.C. (2 counts) for attempting on the life of .W.4 - Arputham and P.W.2 – Thilagaraj A1 Found guilty. Convicted under Section 307 I.P.C. Sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years 7 Section 307 I.P.C. r/w 34 I.P.C. (2 counts) for sharing the common intention with A1 on Charge No.6 A2 to A4 Found not guilty. Acquitted
3. The case of prosecution could briefly be stated thus: P.W.2 - Thilagaraj is employed in B and C Mill. He is also leader of Ambedkar Organisation. The prosecution Witnesses 1 to 4 are related to each other as noted below:-
4. A.1 to A.3 are the sons of one Ekambaram. A.4 is known to the family of the Accused. Both the prosecution witnesses and the Accused are residing in Strehans Road, Otteri.
5. In the year 1993, there was acute water scarcity. On the night of 06.07.1993, P.W.1 - Pameela came to the house of her parents. On the mid night of 06.07.1993 - 11.00 p.m., P.W.2 - Thilagaraj and others had undertaken the repair work in the Street pipe and P.W.5 - Advocate Ramanathan was talking to P.W.2. At that time, without following the queue system, A.2, A.3 and one Santharam interrupted in between and had drawn water, for which P.W.2 and P.W.5 objected which resulted in wordy quarrel between Vincent, son of P.W.2 and the said Santharam. The said Santharam uttered vulgar abuses against P.W.5, against which P.W.5 lodged a complaint before Otteri Police Station. On that night itself, Santharam and others came in gathering themselves aggressively against Vincent.
6. The occurrence on 07.07.1993 - 1.00 p.m. was in sequel to the occurrence on the night of 06.07.1993. After taking food, P.W.2 was washing his hands. At that time, A.1 armed with knife and A.2 to A.4 armed with stout sticks picking up a wordy quarrel and uttering vulgar abuses, A.1 inflicted cut injury on the back of head; left side neck, left side chest of P.W.4 - Arputham, wife of P.W.2. When P.W.2 tried to intervene, A.1 inflicted cut injuries on his left side abdomen, right forehead and right shoulder. When P.W.2 had fallen down, he sustained abrasions in his right forearm. A.2 to A.4 are alleged to have beaten P.W.1 - Pameela, P.W.3 Manju Helan Mary with stout sticks.
7. Injured P.Ws.1 and 4 were taken to the Hospital by one Velu and Prabhakaran. They were admitted in the Madras Medical College Hospital on 07.07.1993 - 2.50 p.m. P.W.6 - Dr.Vijay Anandan treated the injured, noting the injuries on the persons of P.Ws.2 to 4 and has issued Exs.P.3, 4 and 2 respectively. Injuries sustained by P.Ws.2 and 4 were found to be grievou
