Back
2010 Supreme(Mad) 5207
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.S. KARNAN
Krishnamurthy
Versus
State by Inspector of Police, F-2, Egmore Police Station, Chennai
Crl. A. No.820 of 2009
Decided On :12-03-2010
For the Appellant :S. Pannerselvam, Advocate.
For the Respondent: V.R. Balasubramanian, Addl. Public Prosecutor.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on direct evidence, corroborating medical evidence, and the recovery of material objects to establish guilt under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Headnote:
Murder - Indian Penal Code - Section 302 - Summary: The court found the accused guilty of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code based on direct evidence from witnesses and corroborating medical evidence. The recovery of material objects and the accused's confession statement further supported the prosecution's case. The judgment of the Trial Court for finding the accused guilty for murder and awarding life imprisonment was confirmed.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, an agent for selling kidneys, was murdered by the accused who dropped a heavy stone on his head while he was sleeping at a hospital. Witnesses caught the accused red-handed, and the prosecution relied on their evidence, along with the recovery of material objects and the accused's confession statement.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code based on the direct evidence of witnesses, the recovery of material objects, and the accused's confession statement.
Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the witnesses and the sufficiency of evidence to prove the accused's guilt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the direct evidence of witnesses, the recovery of material objects, and the accused's confession statement to establish the accused's guilt for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The judgment of the Trial Court for finding the accused guilty for murder and awarding life imprisonment was confirmed.
Judgment was delivered by M. CHOCKALINGAM, J.
1. Challenge is made to the judgment dated 31.7.2007 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai in S.C. No.78 of 2007, whereby the sole accused stood charged, tried and found guilty for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months.
2. The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated thus:-
(i) The deceased was an agent for selling kidneys. He approached the accused and asked him to part with his kidney for selling it at higher price and on his representation, the accused came to Madras. On 13.11.2006 at early hours at 00.15, the deceased was sleeping at the portico of intensive Maternity Wing Building at Maternity Hospital at Egmore. The accused was sitting sleepless and thinking over about giving his kidney. He thought that if he would remove his kidney, he would die. Suddenly, the accused, with an intention to commit murder of the deceased, took a heavy stone and dropped it on the head of the deceased and thereby, caused his death.
(ii) This was witnessed by P.W.1, plastic goods vendor and P.W.2 who was working in the cycle shop nearby and they were sitting and chatting with each other. On seeing this, they caught the accused red handed and asked him about the incident. He narrated the reason as to why he caused the death of the deceased. P.W.1 advised him to surrender before the police, instead, the accused ran away.
(iii) P.W.1 went to the respondent police and gave a complaint to the Inspector of Police P.W.6, who in turn, on the strength of Ex.P1 complaint, registered a case in Crime No.2130 of 2006 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Ex.P7 Express First Information Report was despatched to the Court. P.W.6 took up investigation, proceeded to the spot, made an inspection and prepared observation mahazar Ex.P2 and sketch Ex.P8 in the presence of witnesses. Thereupon, he recovered blood stained stone M.O.1, blood stained cement plaster pieces M.O.2 and sample cement plaster piece M.O.3 in the presence of witnesses under the cover of mahazar Ex.P3.
(iv) He examined the witnesses and recorded their statements. He conducted inquest on the dead body and prepared inquest report Ex.P9. The dead body was subjected to autopsy. Pursuant to the request made by the Investigating Officer, P.W.5 Doctor R. Parimala issued post-mortem Certificate Ex.P6, where she opined that the deceased would appear to have died of "head injury". In the said Certificate, he found the following features:-
"Moderately built. Laceration : Right forehead 1 x 0.5 cm. Sub Arachnoid Haemorrahage, Sub Dural Haemorrhage present. Brain is oedematous. Fracture of left & right middle cranial fossa.
Heart chambers filled with fluid Blood. All the internal organs congested (Liver, Lungs, Kidneys, Spleen) Stomach empty. Bladder empty."
(v) Pending investigation, P.W.6 Inspector of Police arrested the accused on 13.11.2006 under the Binny Bridge at Ethiraj Road and recorded the confession statement given by him voluntarily in the presence of witnesses and the admissible portion of the same is marked as Ex.P4. Pursuant to the confession statement, the accused produced the blood stained black pant M.O.5 and the same was recovered in the presence of witnesses under the cover of mahazar Ex.P5. All the material objects were sent to Forensic Department for chemical analysis and the chemical analysis report is marked as Ex.P12. On completion of investigation, final report is filed. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Necessary charges were framed against the accused.
3. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined 6 witnesses and relied on 12 documents and also relied on M.Os.1 to 9. On completion of examination of witnesses on the side of the prosecution, when the accused was questioned under Section 31
