SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Mad) 2566

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.S. KARNAN
Suresh & Others
Versus
State represented by Inspector of Police, Ambattur Police Station, Chennai
Criminal Appeal No.758 of 2008
Decided on: 23-07-2009

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants:V. Gopinath, Senior Counsel, L. Mahendran, Advocate. For the Respondent: N.R. Elango, APP.

The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence and the requirement to establish the necessary circumstances pointing to the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

Section 302 IPC - Murder - 201 read with 34 IPC - Concealment of evidence - 313 Cr.P.C - Circumstantial evidence

Fact of the Case:

The prosecution charged the appellants with murder and concealment of evidence. The deceased was found dead in a lake, and the prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence to prove the guilt of the accused.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the necessary circumstances pointing to the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court highlighted inconsistencies in the witness testimonies and concluded that the prosecution's case was not substantiated.

Issues: The main issue was the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish the guilt of the accused. The court also addressed the reliability of witness testimonies and the admissibility of the alleged confession statement and recovery of material objects.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that in cases relying on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish the necessary circumstances pointing to the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court also highlighted the importance of reliable witness testimonies and the insufficiency of confession statements and material object recoveries alone to prove guilt.

Final Decision: The judgment of conviction and sentence imposed on the appellants was set aside, and they were acquitted of the charges. The appellants were directed to be released forthwith unless their presence was required in connection with any other case.

Judgment :-

M. CHOCKALINGAM, J.

Challenge is made to the judgment of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast track Court IV, Poonamallee, made in S.C.No.65 of 2006, whereby the appellants three in number along with the juvenile accused tried, stood charged and found guilty under Section 302 IPC and awarded life imprisonment as well as found guilty under Section 201 read with 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment.

2.The story of the prosecution case as put forth before the Trial Court can be stated thus:

a) P.W.5 is the father of the deceased Damodharan. He was doing his B.A.Political Science in Presidency College during the relevant time. PW-7 was also doing the said course along with him.

(b) On 18. 2003, both of them returned from the college to Ambattur. PW7 dropped the deceased near the church and left for his place. The deceased told that he want to meet his friends. On the same day, PW3, the paternal uncle of the deceased and PW4, the nephew of the deceased both came to Chennai. When, they were just crossing the railway line at Ambattur, they witnessed the person like the deceased, who was taken by the accused persons. Then they left to Chidambaram.

(c) On 18. 2003 the deceased did not return home. Then PW1 made a search. He went to his native place at Chidambaram and made an enquiry. At that time, Pws.3 and 4 informed him that they saw the deceased in the company of the accused persons. He came to know that the dead body was found in the lake and then he immediately proceeded to the place, where the dead body of his son was found.

(d) Thereafter, P.W.1 proceeded to the respondent police station where PW.13, Inspector of Police was on duty. He gave Ex.P.1 complaint, on the strength of which, a case came to be registered in Crime No.564 of 2003 for the offences under Sections 302, 201 read with 34 IPC. Ex.P.12, F.I.R. was despatched to the Court. P.W.13 took up the investigation, went to the place of occurrence and made an inspection in the presence of the witnesses. He prepared the observation mahazar and drew Ex.P.13, rough sketch. The place of occurrence and the dead body were photographed and M.O.1 and M.O.2 are Photos and Negatives respectively. Then, he conducted inquest on the dead body of the deceased in the presence of the witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared Ex.P.14, the inquest report. Then, the dead body was sent for the purpose of post-mortem.

(e) P.W.2, the Doctor attached to the Government Hospital, Royapettah, on receipt of the requisition, had conducted post-mortem on the dead body of the deceased and issued Ex.P.3, the post-mortem certificate, wherein he has opined that the deceased would appear to have died due to the injuries sustained by him.

(f) Pending investigation, PW-13 came to know that A1 and A2 surrendered themselves before the Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, on 9. 2003 and he took them to police custody. On 9. 2003, the first accused gave a confession, which is marked as Ex.P.21, pursuant to which he produced M.O.10 knife, M.Os.11 knife under the cover of Mahazar Ex.P.23 and on the same day, at about 10.30 a.m., he recorded the confession statement of A2. On 29. 2003, at about 8 a.m., he arrested A3 near Patravakkam Railway Station. On 111. 2003, A4 surrendered before the Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvellore. PW-13, took him into police custody and on the same day, at about 9 a.m., he recorded his confession statement and the admissible part is marked as Ex.,P.25. On 18. 2003, PW-13 examined the witnesses and recorded their statements.

(g) Pending investigation, PW-12 gave a statement to the effect that on 18. 2003 at about 8 p.m., A1 and A2 came to his shop and purchased a toy and cap and they did not make the payment. When he demanded, A1 and A2 informed PW-12 that they have just committed a murder .

(h) When, PW-6 was in the house, four persons came there and informed that they are in the grip of fear since a dead body was found in a lake in Amba













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top