The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder under the Indian Penal Code, and the application of the relevant provisions to the facts of the case.

S. NAGAMUTHU, J.

1. The appellant is the first accused in S.C.No.186 of 2008 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur. The second accused in the said case is one Mr. Sivaraja. During the trial of the case, it was found that the second accused was a juvenile, as on the date of commission of the offence. Therefore, the trial Court had separated the case against A2 and forwarded the same to the Juvenile Justice Board for enquiry under the provisions of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. Thus, ultimately, it was this appellant, who alone faced the complete trial. Finally, the trial Court by judgment dated 30.11.2010 convicted him under Sections 341, 302 and 326 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 IPC (no fine was imposed); to undergo a simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 341 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for nine months for the offence under Section 326 IPC. The sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

The deceased in this case was one Mr. Sivanantha Raja. P.Ws.1,2 and 3 are the son, mother and another son respectively of the deceased. All of them were residing in "Kandiapuram Repatriate camp" in Virudhunagar District. Over trivial matters, the deceased had frequent quarrels with these two accused, who also belonged to the same place. On 16.11.2007, at about 7.00 a.m., the deceased and P.W.1 were proceeding in a TVS motor cycle to the house of one Mr. Ravikumar. When they were nearing the house of Ravikumar, these two accused suddenly appeared at the scene of occurrence; both armed with weapons. The first accused was armed with aruval and the second accused (juvenile accused) was armed with iron pipe. The TVS motor cycle was driven by the deceased, whereas P.W.1 was travelling as pillion rider. On intercepting the motorcycle, suddenly, the first accused cut the deceased on the right hand with aruval. The right hand was severed at the level of lower 1/3rd. Then, he again cut the deceased with aruval on his left hand. P.W.1 tried to intervene with a view to save his father. The second accused (juvenile accused) attacked him with iron pipe on his left thigh, which resulted in a fracture. Then, both the accused fled away from the scene of occurrence. P.W.2, the wife of the deceased, was at that time at her house. She heard the hue and cry from the place of occurrence. When she came out of her house, she found the first accused armed with aruval and the second accused armed with iron pipe. When she went to the place of occurrence, she found the deceased as well as P.W.1 with injuries. P.W.3 is yet another son of the deceased. According to him, at the time of occurrence, he was at his home. As a matter of fact, he was sleeping. On hearing the hue and cry, he woke up and rushed to the place of occurrence. He found these two accused armed with weapons. He also found P.W.1 and the deceased with injuries. Immediately, P.W.3 made arrangements to shift the deceased as well as P.W.1 to the hospital. P.W.4 was then owning a Tata Sumo car. At request, he rushed to the place of occurrence and in his Tata Sumo car, he shifted the deceased and P.W.1 to the Government Hospital, at Sivakasi. The amputated hand of the deceased was also taken.

3. P.W.5 was an Assistant Surgeon attached to the Government Hospital at Sivakasi. On 16.11.2007, at 8.45 a.m., P.W.1 was brought to him for treatment. P.W.1 told him that he was attacked by two known persons with iron rod and aruval. P.W.1 was conscious. On examination, on the body of the P.W.1, he found the following injuries:-

(i) Incised wound in left forearm 20 x 10 x bone depth about 50