Back
2010 Supreme(Mad) 4910
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.S. KARNAN
Sivsankar
Versus
Inspector of Police Bahour Police Station Pondicherry
CRL.A.No.567 of 2010
Decided On : 12-11-2010
For the Appellant: Venkataraman, Senior Counsel for V. Krishnakumar, Adovcate.
For the Respondent: A.P. Suryaprakasam, Public Prosecutor (Pondicherry).
In cases relying on circumstantial evidence, the accused must explain missing circumstances within their knowledge to rebut the prosecution's case.
Headnote:
MURDER - Criminal Law - Sec.302 of IPC - [Sec.302 of IPC] - The court discussed the circumstantial evidence and the confessional statement of the accused, along with the recovery of the piece of cloth used for strangulation, to establish the guilt of the accused. The court emphasized the need for the accused to explain missing circumstances within his knowledge and upheld the trial court's decision based on the proven circumstances.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was charged with the murder of his wife, and the prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence to prove the case. The deceased was found dead in the appellant's house, and the prosecution established the cause of death as asphyxia due to strangulation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty based on the circumstantial evidence, confessional statement, and the recovery of the piece of cloth used for strangulation. The court emphasized the appellant's failure to explain the missing circumstances within his knowledge and upheld the trial court's decision.
Issues: The issues revolved around the sufficiency of evidence, inconsistencies in witness testimony, and the recovery of the piece of cloth used for strangulation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the accused to explain missing circumstances within his knowledge in a case based on circumstantial evidence. The court upheld the trial court's decision based on the proven circumstances and the confessional statement of the accused.
Final Decision: The criminal appeal was dismissed, confirming the judgment of the trial court.
(M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.)
1. This appeal challenges a judgment of the II Additional Sessions Division, Puducherry, made in S.C.No.4 of 2006 whereby the sole accused/appellant stood charged under Sec.302 of IPC, tried, found guilty of murder and awarded life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1000/- and default sentence.
2.The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows:
(a) P.W.1 is the husband of P.W.2. The deceased Sellathangal was the brothers daughter of P.W.1. She was given in marriage to the accused/appellant 15 years back. As a result of the same, P.W.6, the son, was born. He was 11 years old at the time of the occurrence. The deceased Sellathangal and the appellant had misunderstanding, and P.W.1 and the other family members used to intervene and pacify the same. Prior to the occurrence, he attempted to cause her death by smothering. The same was actually brought to the notice of P.W.1. Thereafter, a panchayat was convened, and the situation was pacified.
(b) On the date of occurrence that was on 30.10.2005, the accused/appellant came to the house of P.W.1 and made a request to P.W.2 to send Sellathangal with him to his house. At that time, P.W.2 also assured to do so. After sometime, leaving Sellathangal and the accused in the house, P.Ws.1 and 2 went to a nearby house to witness TV. After witnessing TV, they slept there. The next morning, when they came back to the house, they did not find Sellathangal, and after sometime, P.W.6 informed them that Sellathangal was found dead. Immediately, they proceeded to the house of the accused and found the dead body. Then P.W.1 proceeded to the respondent police station and gave Ex.P1, the complaint, on the strength of which, P.W.14, the Sub Inspector of Police, registered a case in Crime No.201/2005 under Sec.302 of IPC. The printed FIR, Ex.P26, was despatched to the Court.
(c) P.W.15, the Inspector of Police of that Circle, on receipt of the copy of the FIR, took up investigation, proceeded to the spot, made an inspection and prepared an observation mahazar, Ex.P27, and also a rough sketch Ex.P28. The police photographer was also taken to the place of occurrence, and it was photographed. Then he conducted inquest on the dead body in the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared an inquest report, Ex.P31. The dead body was sent to the Government Hospital for the purpose of postmortem.
(d) P.W.7, the Specialist G-II & Head, Department of Forensic Medicine, General Hospital, Pondicherry, on receipt of the requisition, has conducted autopsy on the dead body of Sellathangal and has issued a postmortem certificate, Ex.P8. The Doctor has opined in Ex.P9 that the cause of death of the deceased Sellathangal was due to asphyxia due to strangulation.
(e) The accused/appellant surrendered before the Court on 31.10.2005, and a memo was filed for taking him to police custody. Accordingly, the same was ordered. When he was under police custody, he came forward to give a confessional statement, and the same was recorded in the presence of P.W.10, the Village Administrative Officer (VAO), and another. The admissible part of the confessional statement is marked as Ex.P17. He also produced M.O.2, a piece of saree, which was used by him to strangulate her, and the same was also recovered under a cover of mahazar. He was sent for judicial remand. On completion of the investigation, the Investigator filed the final report.
3. The case was committed to Court of Session, and necessary charge was framed. In order to substantiate the charge, the prosecution marched 15 witnesses and also relied on 32 exhibits and 10 material objects. On completion of the evidence on the side of the prosecution, the accused was questioned under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. as to the incriminating circumstances found in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses which he flatly denied as false. No defence witness was examined. The trial Court heard the arguments advanced on
