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

2010 Supreme(Mad) 3130

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R. SHIVAKUMAR
Karuna Jyothi
Versus
State rep. by The Inspector of Police (L&O)
Criminal Appeal No.134 of 2010
Decided On : 30-07-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant:K. Kannan, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Hasan Md. Jinnah, Additional Public Prosecutor.

Headnote:INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 - SECTION 302 -

       Previous quarrel of deceased with accused stating that he had insulted him in presence of his friends - At about early morning PW1, Accused dropped pestle stone on head of deceased, which led to head injuries - Deceased admitted in a private hospital and succumbed to death - Lower court convicted accused/appellant - Appeal to High Court - HELD, it is highly doubtful as to whether PW1 could have been the eye witness - Absence of proper explanation for the delay in furnishing information to the police will also add fuel to the suspicion that an occurrence that took place somewhere else has been sought to be projected as the one that occurred in a flat. The court below, has not properly appreciated this aspect but came to an erroneous conclusion. HELD above finding of the trial court is defective and infirm, that the prosecution has failed to prove its case and prove the guilt of the accused beyond any reasonable suspicion and that the prosecution case is surrounded by reasonable suspicions - Conviction and sentence set aside.

       Result: Crl. Appeal allowed.

Judgment :-

(P.R.SHIVAKUMAR, J.)

1. The sole accused, who stood charged, tried and found guilty as per the charge for an offence of murder punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- with a default sentence to undergo two years simple imprisonment in case of default in payment of fine, by the judgment of the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.1), Chennai in sessions case No.128/2009, has brought-forth this appeal challenging the conviction and sentence.For the sake of convenience, the appellant herein is referred to as accused.

2. The case of the prosecution as culled out from the evidence adduced on the side of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:- i) P.W.2-Pandiraj is running a Travels by name Pavi Travels, having its office at No.66, Kalaimagal Nagar 3rd Road, Ekkattuthangal, Chennai-32. P.W.1-Babu, P.W.3-Balachander, the deceased Manikandan and the accused Karuna Jyothi, were all employees of P.W.2 and were employed under him as drivers.P.W.2 had taken an apartment in the building bearing door No.5/4, Bharatiyar Street, Ekkattuthangal, Chennai for the temporary accommodation of his employees. P.W.1, deceased Manikandan and the accused Karuna Jyothi were residing in the said apartment taken on rent by their employer, namely P.W.2.They had the Ayudha Pooja celebration in the Travels office on 08.10.2008 and thereafter P.W.1 and the accused Karuna Jyothi returned to their flat at about 9.00 p.m.Half an hour later the deceased Manikandan came there along with two other persons and at that point of time, he was carrying liquor bottles.Soon after the deceased entered the room along with those two persons, the accused Karuna Jyothi objected for their taking liquor in the room following which the deceased, along with those two persons who accompanied him, went out of the room to have the liquor somewhere else.After a lapse of an hour, the deceased Manikandan alone came back to the room and he was found at that time under the influence of alcohol.He quarreled with the accused Karuna Jyothi stating that he had insulted him in the presence of his friends.Thereafter, accused Karuna Jyothi left the room and P.W.1 and the deceased went to bed.Accused Karuna Jyothi and his employer, namely P.W.2-Pandiraj stayed the night in the Travels office. At about 5.00 a.m on 09.10.2008, by chance P.W.1 woke up and saw the lights were switched on and the accused was about to drop a pestle stone on the deceased who was sleeping in the room.Before ever P.W.1 could get up and prevent the accused from dropping the pestle stone on the deceased, the accused dropped the pestle stone on the head of the deceased, which led to bleeding injuries on the head.Thereafter, he contacted his employer, namely P.W.2 over phone and informed him of the incident.On being woken up by the phone call of P.W.1, P.W.2 realised that the accused had gone out of the office of the Travels.Immediately, P.W.2 contacted his elder brother Easwaramoorthy and asked him to make arrangements in the private hospital by name Balaji Hospital for the admission of the deceased for treatment.Then P.W.2, went to the place of the occurrence in his Tata Indica car bearing Regn.No.TN-09 AS-5128 of which P.W.3-Balachander was the driver. Then the deceased Manikandan was taken to the private hospital, namely Balaji Hospital at Guindy where the deceased was given initial treatment by P.W.12-Dr.Prem Anand after recording Ex.P9-Accident Register. On examination of the deceased Manikandan, P.W.12 found a wound on the back side of the left ear through which blood was coming out and a crack in the skull.He was informed that the deceased was attacked with a pestle stone at the place of his work at Anbu Street, Ekkattuthangal.After brief treatment at the said hospital, since the condition of the deceased was critical he was referred to the Government General Hospital for better management. The Discharge Summary issu




















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