The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on quality over quantity of evidence, the consideration of sudden quarrel and provocation in determining the nature of the accused's actions, and the application of appropriate charges and sentencing under the Indian Penal Code.

(M. CHOCKALINGAM, J.)

1. This appeal challenges the judgment dated 12.3.2010 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.V, Chennai in S.C. No.38 of 2010, 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.5,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.

2. The short facts necessary for the disposal of the case can be stated thus:

(i) P.W.1 is working as Watchman in Kalaisekaran boat. On 28.9.2009, during morning hours between 6 and 7 a.m., he found the dead body of a male near the fisherman godown. Immediately, he went to the police station and gave a complaint to P.W.13, on the strength of which a case came to be registered in Crime No.246 of 2009 for the offence under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code. First Information Report Ex.P7 was despatched to the Court.

(ii) Thereafter, P.W.13 went to the place of occurrence, made an inspection and prepared Observation mahazar Ex.P8 and rough sketch Ex.P9. He also recovered blood stained stones M.O.7 series, shirt M.O.2, blood stained fishing net M.O.4, plain fishing net M.O.5, bottle pieces M.O.6 from the place of occurrence under the cover of mahazar Ex.P10 in the presence of witnesses. P.W.13 also took photographs of the dead body through P.W.10 Photographer. M.O.8 series are the photographs.

(iii) Thereafter, P.W.13 conducted inquest on the dead body and prepared Ex.P11 inquest report in the presence of witnesses. Thereafter, he sent the dead body for conducting post-mortem. P.W.12 Doctor, who conducted post-mortem, issued postmortem Certificate Ex.P6 where he has opined that the deceased would appear to have died of shock and hemorrhage and due to multiple injuries sustained by him. After postmortem is over, the shirt was removed from the dead body, from where the name of Kishore Menswear was found.

(iv) Immediately, P.W.13 took a clue from the shirt and proceeded to the address and met P.W.4 Tailor. After verifying the records in register, he informed P.W.13 about the address of the person, who had stitched M.O.2 shirt in his shop. Taking the address, P.W.13 proceeded to the place, met P.W.5 and interrogated him. In reply, P.W.5 stated that it was the shirt given by him to the deceased. Immediately after verifying the same, P.W.7 father of the deceased was informed. He identified the shirt and also identified the body of the deceased.

(v) After receipt of post-mortem Certificate Ex.P6, the case was altered to one under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Altered First Information Report Ex.P12 was despatched to the Court. Pending investigation, P.W.13 has also interrogated P.W.6, who was also the Watchman in the boat. P.W.6 gave statement to the effect that on the night hours of 28.9.2009, he saw both the accused/appellant and the deceased in a drunken mood and they were quarreling. Thereafter, on the morning hours of 29.9.2009, after taking tea, when he was coming back to the boar, he saw the deceased was lying down at that time and the accused was entering into the shed from outside. Thereafter, the accused threw the brick plastered with cement on the deceased and shouted at the deceased that he should die with that and thereafter, he left the place. In the grip of fear, P.W.6 did not tell the same to anybody. Equally, P.W.8 has also seen both the deceased and the accused in a drunken mood on 28.9.2009 at 10 p.m. and they were quarreling with each other. Their statements were also recorded.

(vi) Following the same, P.W.13 arrested the accused and on arrest, the accused came forward to give confession statement voluntarily and the same was recorded in the presence of witnesses and the accused was sent for judicial remand. On completion of investigation, final report is filed. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Necessary charges were framed agai