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

2008 Supreme(Mad) 3002

Madras High Court
D. MURUGESAN, M. SATHYANARAYANAN, JJ.
Pattu & Others
Versus
State rep. by The Inspector of Police Thoothukudi North Police Station
Criminal Appeal (MD) Nos.415, 430 & 467 of 2007
Decided on : 20-08-2008

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioners:V. Gopinath, Senior Counsel, P. Andiraj, V. Kathirvelu, R. Shunmugasundaram, Senior Counsel, S. Ravi, Advocates.
For the Respondent: P.N. Pandithurai, Additional Public Prosecutor.

Headnote:

Ss, 148, 302 r/w 149 IPC - Criminal Appeal - [MAIN LEGAL POINT]

Fact of the Case:

The case involved 22 accused charged with various offenses including murder, attempted murder, and offenses under the Explosive Substances Act. The prosecution alleged that the accused, belonging to different groups, formed an unlawful assembly and attacked members of another group during a public function, resulting in injuries and death.

Finding of the Court:

The trial court convicted and sentenced some of the accused, while acquitting others. The appellants challenged the conviction and sentence, arguing that the evidence presented by the prosecution was unreliable and insufficient to prove their involvement in the offenses.

Issues: The issues revolved around the reliability of the prosecution's evidence, including the complaint, witness testimonies, and medical records, and the sufficiency of evidence to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the suppression of the earliest information regarding the occurrence and the subsequent complaint, along with inconsistencies and unreliability in witness testimonies and medical records, raised doubts about the prosecution's case. It emphasized the need for multiple reliable witnesses in cases involving a large number of offenders and victims.

Final Decision: The court acquitted all the appellants, set aside their conviction and sentence, and directed the release of those in jail. The bail bonds of the acquitted appellants were terminated, and any paid fines were ordered to be refunded.

Judgment

D. Murugesan, J.

Totally 22 accused were arrayed in Sessions Case No.104 of 2006 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.I), Thoothukudi and they stood charged for the offences as detailed below:-

(i) Accused-1 to 22 - Ss, 148, 302 r/w 149 IPC

(ii) Accused-1 - S.307 IPC

(iii) Accused-2 to 22 - S.307 r/w 149 IPC

(iv) Accused-11, 12 & 14 - S.3 of Explosive Substances Act

(v) Accused-1 to 10, 13 & S.3 of Explosive Substances Act r/w 15 to 22 - S.149 IPC

2. On completion of trial, the trial Court found guilty, convicted and sentenced Accused-1 to 10 to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 148 IPC; Accused-1 to 10 each to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.5, 000/-, in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 r/w 149 IPC. In addition to the above, Accused-1 was also sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1, 000/-, in default to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 324 IPC and all the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. However, the trial Court acquitted Accused-1 to 10 in respect of the other charges and acquitted Accused-11 to 22 of all the charges framed against them. Questioning the conviction and sentence, Accused-1 to 5 & 7 to 9 have preferred Criminal Appeal (MD) No.415 of 2007, Accused-6 has preferred Criminal Appeal (MD) No.430 of 2007 and Accused-10 has preferred Criminal Appeal (MD) No.467 of 2007.

3. The case of the prosecution as placed before the trial Court is as follows:-

The accused party belonged to Thoothukudi Sivanthi Adithanar Narpani Mandram and the deceased-Selvaraj and the prosecution party belonged to Thoothukudi Kamaraj Makkal Kazhagam. As the members of Kamaraj Makkal Kazhagam gained the goodwill of the public in respect of their social activities, the members of Sivanthi Adithanar Narpani Mandram had developed grudge against them. In commemoration of the 97th birth anniversary of their leader Thiru.Kamaraj on 15.7.99, the members of Kamaraj Makkal Kazhagam organised a function at Krishnarajapuram Main Road, Thoothukudi. While the function was going on at 10.00 p.m., Accused-1 to 4, 8 to 10 & 18 and 19 armed with aruvals, Accused-5, 11, 21 & 22 armed with knives, Accused-6, 7, 15 to 17 & 20 armed with swords and Accused-11, 12 & 14 armed with country bombs, after forming themselves into an unlawful assembly with a common object of murdering the deceased-Selvaraj, came to that place and Accused-1 to 10 started to cut the deceased on his head, forehead, face, ribs, thigh, hand and other parts of the body with aruvals. Accused-1 by name Pattu alias Patturaj also cut the police constable, P.W.6, on his right shoulder, as he made attempts to prevent the occurrence. Likewise, Accused-11, 12 & 14 threw country bombs on the prosecution party, which exploded, and thereby made everyone to run helter-skelter.

4. P.W.1, who also sustained injury, went to Thoothukudi North Police Station at about 11.00 p.m., on the same day and lodged the complaint, Ex.P13 to P.W.40, the Sub Inspector of Police, which was reduced into writing. The said complaint was registered in Crime No.698 of 1999 for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 307, 332, 506(ii), 302 of IPC and under Sections 3 to 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and the printed First Information Report is Ex.P-14. He sent the original First Information Report and the complaint to the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Thoothukudi through the Grade I Constable, P.W.38 and also the copies to the higher police officials.

5. Thereafter, the investigation was taken over by one Thiru. Syed Sahabudeen, Inspector of Police (since deceased). As per the evidence of P.W.45, Deputy Superintendent of Police, the deceased Inspector of Police proceeded to the scene place at about 1.00 a.m., on 16.7.99 and prepared the Observation Mahazar, Ex.P31 and rough sketch, Ex.P32













































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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