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

2006 Supreme(Mad) 2701

MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. R. SINGHARAVELU AND K. N. BASHA, JJ.
Pandi
v.
State.
Cri. A. No. 59 of 2005
Decided On : 12 -10 -2006.

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
S. Nagamuthu, for Appellant; N. Senthurpandian, Addl. P. P., for Respondent.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the preference of the evidence of the eye-witnesses over the medical evidence and the analysis of the accused's intention in committing the offence.

Headnote:

Conviction - Offence under Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment and also imposing a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and also convicting him under Section 323, IPC and sentencing him to 15 days simple imprisonment - Section 324, IPC (two counts) and under Section 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - [Section 302, IPC, Section 323, IPC, Section 324, IPC, Section 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989] - The court discussed the evidence of the eye-witnesses, medical evidence, and the nature of the offence committed by the accused. The court found that the accused's act fell within the third part of Section 299 and convicted him under Section 304 (II) IPC and sentenced him to five years rigorous imprisonment.

Fact of the Case:

The accused was convicted for the offence under Section 302, IPC and Section 323, IPC for assaulting the deceased with a stick, resulting in her death. The accused was also charged under Section 324, IPC (two counts) and under Section 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the evidence of the eye-witnesses to be clear and cogent, and their evidence was corroborated by the medical evidence. The court concluded that the accused's act fell within the third part of Section 299 and convicted him under Section 304 (II) IPC and sentenced him to five years rigorous imprisonment.

Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the eye-witnesses, the nature of the injuries, and the intention of the accused in causing the death of the deceased.

Ratio Decidendi: The court preferred the evidence of the eye-witnesses over the medical evidence, as it was clear, cogent, and consistent. The court also analyzed the intention of the accused and concluded that his act fell within the third part of Section 299, leading to a conviction under Section 304 (II) IPC.

Final Decision: The conviction under Section 302, IPC was set aside, and the accused was convicted under Section 304 (II) IPC and sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment.

Judgement

K. N. BASHA, J. :- Pandi alias Pandian is a sole accused in this case has come forward with this appeal challenging his conviction and sentence passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Thanjavur, made in S.C. No. 31 of 2002 dated 29-11-2004 convicting him for the offence under Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment and also imposing a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and also convicting him under Section 323, IPC and sentencing him to 15 days simple imprisonment. The learned Trial Judge acquitted him in respect of the charges framed against him under Section 324, IPC (two counts) and under Section 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

2. The accused faced trial under the following backdrop :

(a) It is the case of the prosecution that the accused hails from Vadipatti village of Madurai District. On the date of occurrence i.e. on 1-7-2001 he went to the scene village viz. Pachapillayar Kovil Kulam village in Nagapattinam District as a guest to the house of one Maya Thevar. P.W. 3 is a resident nearer to the house of Maya Thevar and the villagers used to go to the house of P.W. 3 for watching T. V. On the date of occurrence i.e. on 1-7-2001 while P.W. 1 and others were watching T. V. there was a wordy quarrel between the deceased Pappa and her husband P.W. 2 and both of them were shouting which is said to have caused disturbance to the persons who were watching T. V. in the house of P.W. 3 and as a result the accused who has also come to watch T. V. questioned P.W. 2 and the deceased as to why they are shouting and causing disturbance to the persons who were watching T. V. For that P.W. 2 stated that it is a family problem between himself and his wife and questioned him as to why he is interfering. Immediately the accused stated that P.W. 2 is not giving respect to him and thereafter slapped P.W. 2's cheek. On seeing this, the deceased questioned the conduct of the accused as to why he has slapped P.W. 2, her husband and also cursed the accused by throwing sand on him. Thereafter the accused took a stick, M.O. 1 lying on the spot and beat the deceased on his head and the deceased swooned and fell down. P.Ws. 2 and 3 prevented the accused and the accused also assaulted them. Thereafter P.W. 1 and other took the injured/deceased to the Government Hospital, Nagapattinam.

(b) P.W. 6, the Doctor, attached to the Government Hospital, Nagapattinam, examined the injured deceased on 1-7-2001 at 11.15 p.m. It is stated by the Doctor, P.W. 6 that he was informed that the injured was assaulted by four persons with a stick. The Doctor found that the deceased was semiconscious stage and also found two injuries on her. The first injury is on the right side of the head, a lacerated wound and another lacerated wound said to have found by the Doctor on the left forehead. Thereafter the Doctor sent a Memo to the Velipalayam police station under Ex. P.5.

(c) P.W. 12, the Head Constable attached to Velipalayam police station received the intimation, Ex. P.5 from the hospital on 2-7-2001 at 1.00 a.m. and thereafter he went to the Government Hospital, Nagapattinam and found that the deceased was not in a position to talk and she was found unconscious. P.W. 12 recorded the statement from P.W. 1, the daughter-in-law of the deceased under Ex. P.1. P.W. 12 reached the police station at 2.00 a.m. and registered a case in Crime No. 361 of 2001 under Section 325, IPC Ex. P. 11 is the FIR. He sent the FIR to the Judicial Magistrate, Nagapattinam, on 2-7-2001. Thereafter he went to the Government Hospital, Nagapattinam, and examined P.W. 1 again and recorded her statement. He also went to the scene of occurrence and examined P.W. 3 and his wife one Latha and recorded their statements.

(d) The Doctor, P.W. 9, attached to the Government Hospital stated that the deceased died on 2-7-


























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