Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
D. MURUGESAN & V. PERIYA KARUPPIAH
Rajini & Others
Versus
State by the Inspector of Police, Choolaimedu Police Station, Chennai
Crl.A. No. No.672 of 2005 & Crl.A. No. No.982 of 2005, Crl.A. No.91 of 2006 & Crl.A. No. 504 of 2006
Decided On : 04-01-2008
Delay in Test Identification Parade - Doubtful Presence of Witnesses - [DELAY, TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE, PRESENCE OF WITNESSES]
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the conviction of the appellants for the offence under Sections 147 and 302 IPC. The deceased, who ran a hotel, was murdered by the appellants due to a dispute over non-payment for food. The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of witnesses and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the presence of the witnesses at the scene of occurrence to be doubtful, as their conduct and the delay in conducting the Test Identification Parade raised suspicion. The court also noted discrepancies in the accident registers and the delayed submission of witness statements.
Issues: The issues revolved around the doubtful presence of witnesses, delay in conducting the Test Identification Parade, and discrepancies in the accident registers and witness statements.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the doubtful presence of witnesses and the unexplained delay in conducting the Test Identification Parade raised serious doubts about the prosecution's case, leading to the benefit of doubt being given to the appellants.
Final Decision: The judgment convicting the appellants was set aside, and the appellants were ordered to be released. The fine amount, if paid, was ordered to be refunded, and the bail bond of one of the appellants was terminated.
Per D. MURUGESAN, J.
1. These appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 12.7.2005 passed by the learned VII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai (in-charge III Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai) in Sessions Case No.223 of 2004 convicting each of the appellants/A-1, A-2 & A-4 for the offence under Sections 147 and 302 IPC and convicting the appellant/A-3 for the offence under Sections 147 and 302 read with 149 IPC and sentencing each of the appellants/A-1, A-2 & A-4 to one year rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 148 IPC and to life imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to one year rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC. Likewise, appellant/ A-3 was also sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 147 IPC and to life imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to one year rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 read with 149 IPC. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Challenging the above conviction and sentence, the present appeals have been preferred by the appellants.
2. A-5 to A-7, who were tried along with the appellants, were convicted for the offence under Section 148 IPC and each was sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment and they have not preferred any appeal before this Court.
3. Initially six accused namely, A-1 to A-6 were tried in S.C.No.223 of 2004. As the seventh accused was absconding, the case in respect of A-7 was split up and tried separately in S.C.No.224 of 2004. However, as the trial in respect of both the cases related to one occurrence, the learned Sessions Judge tried A-7 also along with A-1 to A-6 in respect of the charges framed against them and convicted each of them for the offences as stated above.
4. The Inspector of Police, R-5, Choolaimedu Police Station laid the final report for the offence under Sections 148, 341 and 302 IPC against A-1, A-2 & A-4 to A-6; for the offence under Sections 147, 341, 302 read with 149 IPC against A-3 and for the offence under Sections 148, 341, 302 read with 149 IPC against A-7 on the charge that the deceased-Pandi Kannan was running a hotel under the name and style “New Velu Chettinad Hotel” at No.84, Tiruvalluvarpuram First Street, Choolaimedu,Chennai. A-1 to A-7 in this case used to take lunch in the said hotel, but did not pay the bill. The deceased used to demand money from A-1 to A-7 whenever they visited the hotel. Enraged over the said demand of money by the deceased, A-1 to A-7 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and armed with knives and aruval with an intention to commit the murder of the deceased, went to the hotel on the midnight of 12.8.2002 and while A-3 caught hold of the deceased, the other accused attacked the deceased on his hands, legs, right shoulder, back, stomach, chest, cervical, face and head and caused bleeding injuries as a result of which, the deceased succumbed to the injuries in the hospital.
5. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined 15 witnesses, marked 32 exhibits and produced 12 material objects.
6. The accused were put on trial on the following prosecution case:-
P.W.1-Pandi Durai, P.W.2-Vadivel and the deceased-Pandi Kannan are the sons of P.W.3-Chintamani. The deceased was residing in the first floor of Door No.84, Tiruvalluvar Salai,Choolaimedu along with his mother-P.W.3 and his sisters daughters Ishwarya and Nithya Devi. The “New Velu Military Hotel” was run by the deceased in the ground floor of the said premises. Just one and half years prior to the occurrence, the deceased was doing the business of lending money in the place where the hotel was run. P.Ws.1 & 2 were the residents of Mannady.
P.W.3 was residing alongwith the deceased. P.W.1 used to visit the house of the deceased once in two days. After the closure of the hotel, the deceased demanded money from A-1 to A-3 for the food they had taken. In view of such repeated demand, A-1 to A-3 got
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
