Back
2009 Supreme(Mad) 5113
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. PERIYA KARUPPIAH
Manthoon & Others
Versus
State by: The Inspector of Police, Chennai
Criminal Appeal No.512 of 2009
Decided On : 27-11-2009
For the Appellants:S. Jayakumar, Senior Counsel, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Babu Muthu Meeran, Addl. P.P.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and inconsistencies in evidence and delays in reporting the case can cast doubt on the authenticity of the prosecution's case.
Headnote:
IPC - Criminal Law - Sections 302 r/w 34, 324 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the application of sections 302 r/w 34 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code. It highlighted the prosecution's failure to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, casting doubt on the authenticity of evidence and the delay in reporting the case.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were charged and found guilty under sections 302 r/w 34 IPC and 324 IPC. The deceased and others were assaulted, leading to the death of the deceased. The prosecution's evidence was challenged, including the authenticity of the complaint and the delay in reporting the case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It highlighted inconsistencies in the evidence, including doubts about the authenticity of the complaint and the delay in reporting the case.
Issues: The issues included the authenticity of the complaint, the delay in reporting the case, and inconsistencies in the evidence presented by the prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the prosecution's failure to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, casting doubt on the authenticity of evidence and the delay in reporting the case.
Final Decision: The judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court was set aside, and the appellants were acquitted of the charges.
M. Chockalingam, J.
Challenge is made to the judgment of the Additional District and Sessions Division, Fast Track Court-V, Chennai, made in S.C.No.427 of 2008 whereby the appellants five in number, stood charged, tried and found guilty under sections 302 r/w 34 IPC and 324 IPC (4 counts) and awarded life imprisonment each and one year rigorous imprisonment each respectively along with fine and default sentences. The sentences are ordered to run concurrently.
2. The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows:
(a) P.W.1 is the complainant. P.Ws. 2 and 3 came from Andhra Pradesh to eke their livelihood. They along with others were staying in Venkateshwara Kalyanamandapam, New Washermenpet, Chennai.. They were brought for the work of loading and unloading of goods in Chennai Port. About 28 persons were staying there. Out of 28 persons, 8 persons were in one group, wherein P.W.1 was in that group and 20 others were in another group. On the date of occurrence, that was on 20.7.2008 at about 9.00 to 10.00 p.m., when A1 was lying in the first floor and P.W.1 was sitting by his side, the deceased Srinivasan came there and slapped A1. All the accused questioned about the same. The deceased felt sorry for the same but the accused persons were not satisfied. They took the wooden clubs and attacked him. When P.Ws.1 to 3 intervened, they were also assaulted by the accused. All the accused dragged the deceased to the nearby water tank and attacked him indiscriminately. The same was informed to the Supervisor of the Kalyanamandapam. The Supervisor along with others took the deceased to the Apollo Hospital. Since they could not meet the expenses, they took him to the Government Hospital, where P.W.8 doctor was on duty. The deceased was admitted at about 11.55 p.m.
(b) P.W.1 after leaving him in the hospital, proceeded to the respondent Police station and he gave Ex.P1 complaint. Since he gave an oral complaint in telugu, he took the assistance of P.W.6 who knew telugu. P.W.6 translated the same. The oral complaint was actually reduced into writing which was marked as Ex.P1. On the strength of Ex.P1 complaint, a case came to be registered by P.W.16 Sub Inspector of Police of the Respondent Police Station in Crime No.299/2008 under sections 324, 307 and 506(2) IPC The express F.I.R. Ex.P25 was despatched to Court. The same reached the Magistrate at 11.00 a.m. on 27. 2008.
(c) Following the same P.W.17, Inspector of Police on receipt of the copy of the F.I.R., took up investigation, went to the spot, made an inspection in the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared the observation mahazar, Ex.P26 and drew a rough sketch, Ex.P.27. He recovered the material objects M.Os.4 and 5 bricks and granite stones respectively under a cover of mahazar.
(d) Pending investigation, a message was received from the Hospital that Srinivasan died at about 6.40 a.m. Then, the case was altered to section 302 IPC and the amended F.I.R. Ex.P29 was despatched to Court. The inquest was conducted by the Investigating Officer in the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared Ex.P.30 inquest report. The dead body was subjected to post mortem. P.W.13 doctor conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and gave his opinion in Ex.P23 post mortem certificate wherein he has opinion that the deceased would appeared to have died out of multiple injuries sustained by him. Pending investigation, the accused were arrested and they gave confessional statement pursuant to which the material objects, weapon of crime-wooden clubs were recovered. They were sent for judicial remand.
(e) P.Ws. 2 and 3 were examined by P.W.10 doctor and he issued accident register copy Exs.P 7 and 8 respectively which were marked. On completion of the investigation, the investigating officer filed a final report.
(f) The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Necessary charges were framed. In order to substantiate the charges,
