Back
2003 Supreme(Mad) 1103
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM
Muthuswamy & Another - Appellant
Versus
Inspector of Police - Respondents
C.A.No.964 of 1995
Decided On : 24 July 2003
The dying declaration, medical evidence, and eyewitness testimony are crucial in establishing guilt in criminal cases.
Headnote:
IPC - Criminal Assault - Ss 341, 302, 302 r/w 34 and 355 - Summary: The judgment discusses the conviction and sentence of the appellants for offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. The court considered the dying declaration, medical evidence, and eyewitness testimony to establish the guilt of the accused. The court also addressed the delay in filing the FIR and the turning hostile of eyewitnesses. The conviction under Sec.302 of IPC was not sustained, and the appellants were convicted under other relevant sections. The court modified the sentence based on the circumstances of the case.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a quarrel related to cow brokerage business, leading to an assault on the deceased by the appellants. The deceased made a dying declaration, and medical evidence supported the prosecution's case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellants guilty based on the dying declaration, medical evidence, and eyewitness testimony. The court addressed the delay in filing the FIR and the turning hostile of eyewitnesses.
Issues: The issues included the validity of the dying declaration, delay in filing the FIR, and the credibility of eyewitness testimony.
Ratio Decidendi: The dying declaration, medical evidence, and eyewitness testimony were crucial in establishing the guilt of the accused. The delay in filing the FIR and the turning hostile of eyewitnesses did not undermine the prosecution's case.
Final Decision: The conviction under Sec.302 of IPC was not sustained. The appellants were convicted under other relevant sections, and the court modified the sentence based on the circumstances of the case.
The appellants who stood charged and tried for the offences under Ss 341, 302, 302 r/w 34 and 355 of I.P.C. respectively have brought forth this appeal challenging the conviction and sentence passed by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli, as detailed below.
2. The short facts barring the unnecessary details can be stated thus:
(a) The deceased Palaniappan and the appellants were all doing cow brokerage business at Uppidamangalam Sandi, Karur District. On 8.5.94, there was a wordy quarrel between the deceased and the appellants in connection with their business. A-1 threatened the deceased that he will do away him. At about 11.00 P.M., when the deceased returned to his house after finishing his work at water tank near Uppidamangalam, both the accused waited there. On seeing the deceased, the first accused wrongfully restrained him and said that "eP vg;g ghh;j;jhYk; vdf;F bfLjy; gz;zpf;fpl;L ,Uf;nf ,j;njhL xHpe;J ngh". So saying, A-1 fisted on the chest of the deceased twice and with legs kicked on the stomach and chest of the deceased several times. A-2 attacked the deceased with chappal five times. P.W.1 Ramalingam and P.W.2 Bagulsamy @ Palanisamy witnessed the entire occurrence. The accused fled away from the scene of occurrence. After sometime, the deceased reached his house and informed his wife P.W.3 Kaliammal and his brother-in-law P.W.5 Palaniappan. On 9.5.94 P.W.5 came to the house of the deceased at about 5.00 P.M. and brought the deceased to the Government Hospital, Karur at 9.15 P.M. P.W.10 Dr.Rajamanickam examined the deceased, gave treatment and issued Ex.P6 accident register. P.W.13 Govindaraj, Head Constable, Karur Police Station received the intimation from the Government Hospital, Karur about the admission of the deceased, and in turn P.W.13 gave intimation to P.W.14 Paramasivam, Sub Inspector of Police, Vellianai Police Station, who received the intimation under Ex.P10 on 9.5.94. At about 10.00 P.M. P.W.14 proceeded to the Government Hospital, Karur, examined the deceased and recorded the statement under Ex.P11 from him and registered a case in Crime No.187/94 under Sec.307 of I.P.C. on the strength of Ex.P11. Ex.P12 express F.I.R. was despatched to the concerned Judicial Magistrate's Court, while the copies were sent to the higher officials.
(b) P.W.14 Sub Inspector took up the investigation, proceeded to the occurrence spot. prepared Ex.P13 observation mahazar and Ex.P14 rough sketch in the presence of the witnesses. He examined P.Ws.1 and 2, recorded their statements and recovered M.O.1 a pair of chappals under Ex.P15 mahazar from the site of occurrence in front of P.W.7 Govindaraju and other witness. P.W.14 proceeded to the Government Hospital, Karur, examined P.W.3 and the deceased and recorded their statements. Ex.P16 is the statement given by the deceased. Thereafter, P.W.14 went to Uppidamangalam and examined P.Ws.6 and 7 and recorded their statements. P.W.10 Doctor made a request to the Judicial Magistrate, Karur under Ex.P3. P.W.9 John Peter Sukumar, Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur on 10.5.94 at about 3.45 A.M. came to the Government Hospital and recorded the dying declaration of the deceased under Ex.P4. When he made the dying declaration to P.W.9, P.W.10 Doctor was also present and certified that the deceased was conscious. Thereafter, the deceased was referred to the Government Hospital, Tiruchy by P.W.10, where he was admitted. Ex.P8 was the accident register. P.W.11 Dr.Ramachandran gave intimation to the police about the death of the deceased through Ex.P7. (c) On 10.5.94 at about 12.30 P.M. the appellants/accused were arrested by P.W.14 Investigating Officer and they were sent for judicial custody. At 12.45 P.M. P.W.14 received the intimation regarding the death of the deceased, and the case was altered to Sec.302 of I.P.C. from Sec.307 of I.P.C. Ex.P17 express report was sent to the concerned Court. At 6.00 P.M. P.W.15 Venkitasamy, Inspector of Police, took up f
