Back
2010 Supreme(Mad) 428
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R. MALA
Dakshina @ Dakshinamoorthy & Others
Versus
State by Inspector of Police
Crl.A.No.402 of 2003
Decided On :02-02-2010
For the Appellants:K. Kannan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:I. Paul Noble Devakumar, Advocate (Criminal side).
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on evidence from prosecution witnesses, medical evidence, and confession statements to determine guilt, as well as the consideration of appropriate provisions of the IPC for the conviction and sentencing.
Headnote:
Criminal Appeal - Assault - Section 326 r/w.34 IPC - Summary: The court discussed the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the medical evidence, and the confession statements to conclude that the accused were guilty under Section 324 r/w.34 IPC instead of Section 326 IPC. The court also considered the employment status of the appellants in determining the leniency in punishment.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted under Section 326 r/w.34 IPC for assaulting the victim. The prosecution presented evidence of the assault and injuries sustained by the victim. The appellants denied the charges.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, medical evidence, and confession statements supported the guilt of the accused. However, the court modified the conviction from Section 326 IPC to Section 324 r/w.34 IPC and considered the appellants' employment in determining the leniency in punishment.
Issues: The main issue was the guilt of the accused under Section 326 r/w.34 IPC and the appropriate punishment for the offense.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, medical evidence, and confession statements to determine the guilt of the accused. The court also considered the provisions of Section 320 and 324 IPC in modifying the conviction.
Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, setting aside the conviction and sentence under Section 326 r/w.34 IPC and convicting the appellants under Section 324 r/w. IPC. The court confirmed the fine imposed and stated that the period of imprisonment already undergone by the appellants was sufficient.
This Criminal Appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by Additional District Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court IV, Chennai) in S.C.No.205 of 2002 on 28.2.2003 convicting accused A1 to A3 under Section 326 r/w.34 IPC and sentencing them 3 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 6 months.
2. The case of the prosecution is as follows:
(a) On 27.2.2001 at 10.30 a.m. near under the Basin Bridge, adjacent to Tamilnadu Electricity Board compound wall, at Basin Bridge Railway Station, when P.W.1-Vasanthi handed over the ground nut to his sister and proceeding to see his mother, the accused were alighted from an auto and the first accused assaulted P.W.1s mother Angammal – P.W.3 on her right hand side of her head with Aruval. When the 1st accused Dakshinamoorthy attempted to assault P.W.3 again, immediately it was prevented by P.W.3 with her right hand and out of that she sustained injury on her right hand.
(b) The second accused Murthy assaulted P.W.3 on left side of her neck by Aruval. The 3rd accused Rajali inflicted injury below the chest of P.W.3. After sustaining grievous injuries , P.W.3 fell down . A4-Arjunan and A5-Jalamurthy assaulted P.W.3 on her back side. Since P.W.1 made an alaram, P.W.2 Indira-sister of P.W.1 rushed to the scene of occurrence and took P.W.2 to Government Stanley Hospital. Then P.W.1 went to police station and lodged complaint Ex.P.1.
(c) Immediately P.W.10-Dr.Manivel at 3.30 p.m. has examined P.W.3 and mentioned the injuries sustained by her and gave Accident Register copy Ex.P.12. In which the following injuries sustained by P.W.3 was mentioned.
"i) 10 cm sutured wound right parietal region
ii) Injury on the neck
iii) Injury near the right
iv) Injury on right hand
v) Injury on left shoulder vi) Injury on back"
P.W.8 Dr.Jayavel Rajkumar after giving treatment to P.W.3 issued wound certificate Ex.P.11 in which it is stated as follows:...
"X-Ray Right hand – AP Lat
X-Ray Skull – AP Lat
X-Ray occipital spine – AP Lat
X-Ray Lumbar spine – AP Lat No fracture.
Opinion:- Grievous "
P.W.12 Rajeswari-Sub Inspector of Police, Basin Bridge received complaint from P.W.1 at 11.15 a.m. and registered a case in crime No.95/01 under Section 307 r/w.34 IPC and prepared First Information Report Ex.P.15.
(d) P.W.13 Senthil Kumar, Inspector of Police has taken up the matter for investigation and went to the place of occurrence at 12.45 p.m. He inspected the place of occurrence in the presence of witnesses Elangovan and Kalaivanan and prepared observation Mahazar Ex.P.16 and drew rough sketch plan Ex.P.17. He examined the witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2, Ramu, Kanniappan, Elangovan and Dr. Manivel (P.W.10) and recorded their statements.
(e) On 28.2.2001 he examined P.W.3 who was injured. P.W.11-Judicial Magistrate Mr. Karunanidhi has received the information for recording the dying declaration of P.W.3. P.W.11 recorded her dying declaration on the basis of the requisition Ex.P.13 received from the investigation officer after following formalities under Ex.P.14. P.W.13 examined other witnesses and after examining the victim, he altered the case from the offence under Section 307 r/w. 34 IPC to Sec.147, 148, 307,r/w.34 IPC. Then he prepared express report Ex.P.19 and then he examined witnesses Thangaraj and Murugesan and recorded their statements.
(f) On 1.3.2001 at 10.30 am. he arrested A5 near Salt quarters main gate. At that time, he gave a confession which was recorded in the presence of Elumalai-P.W.6 and Thanikachalam. In the confession statement he has stated that he is ready to hand over the weapon, that portion is marked as Ex.P.20. In pursuance of that he handed over the weapon which was seized under Ex.p.21.
(g) On 5.3.2001 at 11.30 A.M. he arrested A1-Dakshinamoorthy and A4-Arjunan near Moolakothram bus stand. At that time 1st accused gave confession and the admitted portion of the confession statemen
