The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on eyewitness testimony, medical evidence, and the timing of the F.I.R. in determining the guilt of the accused.

M. Chockalingam, J.

This judgment shall govern these two appeals, namely Criminal Appeal Nos.1013 of 2007 and 1126 of 2007.

2. Criminal Appeal No.1013 of 2007 is filed by A-1 and Criminal Appeal No.1126 of 2007 is filed by A-2 to A-6. These appeals challenge the judgment of the Principal Sessions Division, Kancheepuram District at Chengalpattu made in S.C.No.466 of 2005, whereby the appelants 6 in number stood charged under Sections 148 and 302 r/w S.149 IPC, tried and found guilty as per the charges and awarded one year R.I. each under Section 148 IPC and life imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo one month S.I. under Section 302 r/w S.149 IPC and both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

3. The short facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals can be stated thus:

a) P.W.1 is the wife and P.W.2 is the sister of the deceased Krishnan. He sold his landed properties to the third parties. Even after the sale, the accused made trespass into the said property and laid stones. The husband of P.W.1 removed the said stones and thus, all the accused along with one Mari, who was originally shown as the second accused in the F.I.R. and pending case died, were on inimical terms with the deceased Krishnan.

b) On the date of occurrence, namely on 27. 2000 at about 9.00 p.m., the deceased along with the family members, including his wife P.W.1 and sister P.W.2 and the other children, was witnessing T.V. and thereafter, they went for dinner and he took dinner early, while the others were taking. He went nearby betel shop to purchase betel. Within a short span of time, P.Ws.1 and 2 heard the distressing cry of Krishnan and they came outside. At that time, A-1 to A-6 and the other accused, namely A-1 to A-6 armed with vethukathi and the last accused with wooden log, were attacking him indiscriminately. On hearing the noise raised, all the accused fled away from the place of occurrence.

c) P.W.1 immediately took the deceased in an auto to Tambaram Police station, where she was advised to take the severely injured Krishnan to Chromepet Government Hospital. Accordingly, P.W.1 took him to Chrompet Government Hospital, where she was advised to take him to the Government General Hospital, Chennai, since his condition was so serious. Accordingly, she took him to the Government General Hospital, Chennai, where the severely injured Krishnan was admitted by P.W.12, the Doctor at 10.35 p.m. and Ex.P.32, accident register in this regard was also marked. An intimation was given to Tambaram Police station.

d) On receiving the intimation, P.W.11, the Inspector of Police, proceeded to the Government General Hospital, Chennai and recorded the statement of the injured Krishnan, which was marked as Ex.P.27, on the strength of which, a case came to be registered in Crime No.658 of 2000 under Sections 147, 148, 324 and 307 IPC. Ex.P.29, the FIR was despatched to the Court. Then, P.W.11 proceeded to the spot and made an inspection at 00.45 hours in the presence of the witnesses. He prepared Ex.P.30, the observation mahazar and Ex.P.31, the rough sketch.

e) Then, P.W.13, the Inspector of Police, took up the investigation. Pending investigation, the severely injured Krishnan, who was under treatment, died on 27. 2000. On receipt of the said intimation, the case was altered to Section 302 IPC and Ex.P.33, the alteration report was sent to the court. P.W.13 examined all the witnesses and recorded their statements. He conducted inquest on the dead body of the deceased in the presence of the witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared Ex.P.34, the inquest report. Then, the dead body was sent for the purpose of autopsy.

f) P.W.9, the Doctor attached to the Chennai Medical College, on receipt of the requisition, has conducted post-mortem on the dead body of the deceased and has issued Ex.P.17, the post-mortem certificate, wherein he has opined that the deceased would appear to have died of shock and haemorrhage