Back
2012 Supreme(Mad) 1617
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. MOHAN RAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.M. AKBAR ALI
Kadir @ Kadiravan & Others
Versus
State by Inspector of Police Cuddalore police Station (OT) Cuddalore District
Crl.Appeal Nos.291 of 2011 & 300 of 2011 & M.P.No.1 of 2011
Decided On: 30-03-2012
For the Appellants:V. Gopinath, Senior Counsel for C. Prasanna Venkatesh, A. Arasu Ganesan, Advocates.
For the Respondent: V.M.R. Rajendran, Addl. Public Prosecutor.
The judgment established the importance of considering the specific circumstances and evidence in determining the appropriate charges and convictions under the IPC.
Headnote:
Conviction - Assault - Sec.302 IPC, Sec.307 IPC, Sec.341 IPC - Sec.304 Part I IPC, Sec.324 IPC, Sec.326 IPC
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted for assaulting the deceased and PW1 while returning from a New Year pooja, resulting in the death of the deceased and injuries to PW1. The prosecution's case was supported by eyewitnesses and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence supported a sudden fight between two groups, leading to the death of the deceased and injuries to PW1. The court concluded that the offence under Sec.302 IPC was not attracted, but instead convicted the appellants under different sections of the IPC based on the nature of their actions.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the nature of the assault, the presence of premeditation, and the applicability of different sections of the IPC to the actions of the appellants.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the evidence of eyewitnesses, the nature of the injuries, and the circumstances of the altercation to determine the appropriate charges and convictions for the appellants.
Final Decision: The appeals were partly allowed, setting aside the original convictions and sentences. The court convicted the appellants under different sections of the IPC and imposed new sentences, taking into account the nature of their actions.
G.M. AKBAR ALI, J.
1. The conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge Fast Track Court No.II, Cuddalore in S.C.No.20 of 2011 dated 29.4.2011 are detailed hereunder:
(i) The 1st appellant/A.1 in C.A.No.291 of 2011 was convicted for the offence under Sec.302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and also convicted for the offence under Sec.341 IPC and Rs.500/-was awarded as fine.
(ii) The 2nd appellant/A.2 in C.A.No.291/2011 was convicted for the offence under Sec.307 IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years R.I and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-and also convicted for the offence under Sec.341 IPC and Rs.500/- was awarded as fine.
(iii) The appellant/A.3 in C.A.No.300/2011 was convicted for the offence under Sec.307 IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years R.I and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months Simple Imprisonment and also convicted for the offence under Sec.341 IPC and Rs.500/- was awarded as fine, in default, to undergo 2 months simple imprisonment.
2. For convenience sake, the accused 1 to 3 who are convicted and have preferred the present appeals are mentioned as Appellants 1 to 3.
3. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is as follows:
(a) The accused belong to Sonanguppam. The deceased and the prosecution witnesses belong to Tsunami Nagar which is adjacent to Sonanguppam. On 31.12.2009, due to New Year Celebrations, there used to be special pooja conducted at Ramar Koil at Sonangkuppam.
(b) P.Ws.1 to 5 and the deceased went to Ramar Koil and participated in the special pooja at midnight. Around 1.00 a.m, they were returning to Tsunami Nagar via Enikaranthottam of Sonanguppam in two motor cycles. When they were reaching one Panangkattu Colony cross road, the appellants and other five accused wrongfully restrained them. Since there were previous enmity between the people from Sonangkuppam and Tsunami Nagar, the appellants and others abused them using filthy language. The deceased told them to allow them to leave as they were returning after attending the pooja. While so, the 1st appellant in Appeal No.291/2011 assaulted the deceased with bill hook on the head of the deceased. The appellant/A.3 in C.A 300/2011 assaulted the deceased with aruval and the deceased defended such assault and in that course, his left little finger was cut. A.3 /3rd appellant again assaulted the deceased again on the back. The other acquitted accused also assaulted the deceased. When P.W.1 interfered A.2/2nd appellant assaulted him with broken beer bottle on his head and the other accused also assaulted the deceased and ran away from the scene of occurrence. The injured was taken to Government General Hospital, Cuddalore.
(c) P.W.16 was the doctor attached to Government General Hospital Cuddalore. He examined the deceased. It was alleged that six persons assaulted him and he found a lacerated injury on the back of the head and the left little finger cut and was attached only with the skin portion.
(d) P.W.19 was the Sub Inspector of Police attached to Cuddalore OT Police station. On 1.1.2010 at 1.40 a.m, he received intimation from Government General Hospital Cuddalore and around 3.00 a.m, he recorded statement from PW.1 under Ex.P.1 and came to station and registered a case in Cr.No.3/2010 for an offence 147, 148, 341, 294-b, 323, 324 and 307 IPC. He forwarded the FIR to the court as well as to other higher officials.
(e) P.W.20 was the Inspector of Police and he received the FIR at 6.00 a.m and proceeded to the scene of occurrence, prepared observation mahazar and drew rough sketch. From there he proceeded to Government General Hospital Cuddalore and examined PWs.1 to 4 and recorded their statements. The injured was shifted to Government General Hospital Pondicherry and the Inspector received a death intimation stating that the deceased died at 8.45 a.m. At 9.30 a.m, he altered the FIR including an offence under Sec.302 IPC
