Back
2004 Supreme(Mad) 246
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
Dasan & Another - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondents
C.A.No.280/97
Decided On : 20 February 2004
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on the testimony of the sole eye-witness, P.W.1, and the corroboration from medical evidence, arrest of the accused, and recovery of weapons to uphold the conviction under Section 304(II) I.P.C.
Headnote:
Mistake of Fact - Criminal Law - Section 304(II) I.P.C - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 304(II) I.P.C - The court analyzed the evidence and accepted the testimony of the sole eye-witness, P.W.1, finding corroboration from medical evidence, arrest of the accused, and recovery of weapons. The court rejected the defense's contention of self-defense and upheld the conviction under Section 304(II) I.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a violent attack resulting in the death of the deceased, Kannadasan, following a petty quarrel between neighbors. The trial court accepted the testimony of the sole eye-witness, P.W.1, and rejected the defense's contention of self-defense.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of causing the bodily injuries to the deceased and upheld the conviction under Section 304(II) I.P.C.
Issues: The main issues were whether the guilt of the accused was proved beyond reasonable doubt and whether the conviction under Section 304(II) I.P.C warranted interference.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the testimony of the sole eye-witness, P.W.1, and found corroboration from medical evidence, arrest of the accused, and recovery of weapons. The court rejected the defense's contention of self-defense and upheld the conviction under Section 304(II) I.P.C.
Final Decision: The judgment of the Principal Sessions Judge, Tuticorin in S.C.23/93 convicting the Appellants/A1 and A2 under Section 304(II) I.P.C and the sentence of imprisonment was confirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.
Accused 1 and 2 in S.C.23/93 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Tuticorin are the appellants. Aggrieved over the conviction under Section 304(II) I.P.C by the judgment dated 31.3.97 the appellants have preferred this appeal.
2.Charge sheet was originally filed against the Appellants/A1 and A2 and A3-Malar, daughter of A1. A separate Charge Sheet was filed against the Juvenile accused Arul. Case against the Juvenile accused Arul in S.C.24/93 ended in acquittal. In this case the details of the charges framed and the findings of the trial court are as under:
Charge Gist of offence Against which accused Finding 1 u/s 302 I.P.C committing murder of Kannadasan A1 & A2 Found not guilty under Section 302 I.P.C; A1 & A2 convicted u/s.304(II)I.P.C. Each sentenced to undergo R.I for 7 years 2 u/s 302 I.P.C r/w 34 I.P.C sharing the common intention with A1 & A2 for committing murder of Kannadasan A3 Found not guilty. A3 acquitted 3.Case of the prosecution could briefly be stated thus:
Motive: On 21.10.90-6.15 p.m pigs reared by A1 entered the house of P.W.1 and damaged the earthern utensils. Deceased came home after work at about 7.15 p.m. P.W.1 told the deceased about the incident. The deceased started to abuse A2. A2 on hearing the same, dared A1 to come out of the house. The deceased went out of the house. P.W.1 followed him with a Hurricane Lamp. A3 abused the deceased and the deceased also abused A3 in retaliation. A3 beat the deceased with a stick on his shoulder and in retaliation deceased beat A3 with his hands. Since the deceased beat A3, the motive developed.
4.Overt Acts: Since deceased beat A3-Malar with hands, A1 and A2 and another Juvenile accused Arul went to their house and A1 with Palai Aruval (M.O.1) and A2 with Vettu Aruval (M.O.2) and Juvenile Accused with Murukku Thadi (M.O.3) came and picked up quarrel with deceased. The deceased ran inside his house. At that time, A1 with M.O.1-Palai Aruval cut him on the left neck and Juvenile Accused Arul with Murukku Thadi beat deceased on the left neck. Deceased fell down near the house of Essakki Ammal. A2 with Vettu Aruval cut the deceased on the legs and hands indiscriminately. A1 sustained injuries on the hand when A2 was cutting the deceased. Further A1 sustained injury on the head when A3 beat the deceased. On seeing P.Ws.2 and 3, the accused ran towards north with the weapons.
5.Report and Registration of case: P.W.1 and P.W.2 went to Kulasekarapattinam Police Station. P.W.1 gave statement to P.W.12-Sub-Inspector of Kulasekarapattinam Police Station at about 8.15 p.m on 21.10.90 regarding the occurrence. P.W.2 attested Ex.P1. Pursuant to Ex.P1, P.W.12 registered a case in Crime No.354/90 under Section 302 I.P.C and prepared Ex.P16 Printed F.I.R. P.W.12 sent Ex.P1 and P16 to the Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchendur through P.W.10. P.W.12 informed the Inspector P.W.13 about this case over V.H.F. P.W.10 brought the cover containing Exs.P1 and P16 to the Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchendur and having come to know that Srivaikundam Judicial Magistrate was incharge of Tiruchendur Magistrate Court, on the night he went to Srivaikundam and handed over the same to Srivaikundam Judicial Magistrate at 3.10 a.m on 22.10.90.
6.Investigation: P.W.13-Inspector of Police, on receipt of Ex.P16 on 21.10.90-9.15 p.m took up investigation and reached the scene of occurrence at about 10.00 p.m and prepared Ex.P6-Observation Mahazar and also drew Rough Sketch Ex.P17 in the presence of P.W.6 and another.
7.Inquest: P.W.13 conducted Inquest over the body of the deceased from 0.15 to 4.15 hours on 22.10.90 in the presence of Panchayatars. Inquest Report is Ex.P18. P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined during Inquest. On completion of Inquest, he prepared Ex.P2-Requisition for Postmortem and sent the body for Postmortem along with Ex.P2 through P.W.11.
8.Postmortem: P.W.4-Dr.Nallathambi Gnanadevakaran, on receipt of Ex.P2, conducted Autopsy on the body of the deceased. He noted 13 cut injuries on the body
