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

2015 Supreme(Mad) 2741

IN THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. Nagamuthu and V.S. Ravi, JJ.
Kannan - Appellant
Vs.
The Inspector of Police, C1 Othakadai Police Station - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (MD). No. 366 of 2009
Decided On: 27.08.2015

Advocates Appeared:
For Appellant: N. Ananthapadmanaban
For Respondent: A. Ramar, Additional Public Prosecutor

The main legal point established is that the appellant's act, provoked by the deceased, fell within the first exception to Section 300 IPC, leading to a conviction under Section 304(i) IPC.

Headnote:

Provocation - Criminal Law - Section 302IPC, Section 304(i)IPC

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted under Section 302 IPC for stabbing the deceased. The prosecution's case was based on eyewitness accounts and medical evidence.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant's act fell within the first exception to Section 300 IPC, leading to a conviction under Section 304(i) IPC. The court considered the provocation and the nature of the act in determining the appropriate punishment.

Issues: The key issue was whether the appellant's act constituted culpable homicide amounting to murder or fell within the first exception to Section 300 IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant's act was provoked by the deceased, leading to a conviction under Section 304(i) IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.

Final Decision: The appellant's conviction under Section 302 IPC was set aside, and he was convicted under Section 304(i) IPC, sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000.

JUDGMENT

S. Nagamuthu, J.

The appellant is the sole accused in S.C. No. 227 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai. He stood charged for offences under Section 302IPC. By judgment dated 20.11.2008, the trial Court found him guilty under Section302 IPC and convicted him and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. 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 was one Mr. Senthilkumar. He was a Driver in a lorry by profession. For quite some time, the accused was working along with the deceased as a Cleaner in the same lorry. Thus, they were known to each other. On 03.03.2007, in the occurrence village, Maasi festival was celebrated by the villagers. P.W.1's husband Mr. Kannan was in the festival participating in the same. The accused was also standing in the crowd witnessing the festival. At that time, P.W.1's husband took a sum of Rs. 10/- from the pocket of the accused. This, according to the prosecution, was done by Mr. Kannan only for fun. But the accused did not take it so. He took it very seriously and scolded the husband of P.W.1. Therefore, the husband of P.W.1 returned the said amount and kept in the pocket of the accused. At that time, the deceased Senthilkumar, who is the brother of P.W.1 and brother-in-law of Mr. Kannan and others were also present. Mr. Senthilkumar questioned the accused as to why he used such abusive language against his brother-in-law Mr. Kannan. This resulted in a quarrel. They scuffled with each other. The people, who were present separated them and pacified them. The deceased and Mr. Kannan returned to the house of P.W.1 and narrated the event to her. Thereafter the deceased left for some other work. The deceased went to Mandhai Savadi. After some time, while P.W.1 was at her house, she heard a hue and cry from Mandhaisavadi. Immediately, she along with P.W.2 rushed to the mandhaisavadi. There she found that the accused and the deceased were fighting with each other. P.Ws.1 and 2 shouted at the accused not to do any harm to the deceased. But the accused took out a knife from his waist and stabbed the deceased once on his back. The deceased fell down. The accused ran away from the scene of occurrence. The occurrence took place at 03.15 p.m. Within a short time, the deceased breathed his last. Thus, P.W.1 went to the Othakadai Police Station and made a complaint at 4.00 p.m.

2.1. P.W.12 the then Sub Inspector of Police, Othakadai Police Station on receipt of the said complaint (Ex.P1) registered a case in Crime No. 105 of 2007 under Sections 341 and 302IPC. Ex.P13 is the FIR. He forwarded Exs.P1 and P.13 to the Court and handed over the case diary to P.W.13 for investigation.

2.2. P.W.13 took up the case for investigation at 4.45 p.m. on 03.03.2007. He proceeded to the place of occurrence, prepared an observation mahazar and a rough sketch at the place of occurrence in the presence of P.W.6 and another witness. He also recovered bloodstained earth (M.O.2) and sample earth (M.O.3) and a pair of chappals (M.O.4) from the place of occurrence. On the same day, at 6.00 p.m., he conducted inquest on the body of the deceased and prepared Ex.P15 report. Then, he forwarded the body for postmortem.

2.3. P.W.8 - Dr.Natarajan conducted autopsy on the body of the deceased at 11.15 p.m. on 04.03.2007. He found the following injuries:

1. An oblique stab injury measuring 3 x 1 cms x pleural cavity deep noted on the back of lower part of left side of chest 8 cms below the inferior angle of scapula, 10 cms lateral to midline.

On dissection, the wound passes obliquely forwards and medially piercing the underlying muscles, vessels and nerves in the 9th intercostal space and piercing the underlying pleura and lower lobe of left lung measuring 2 x 1 x 1 cms and ends as a point





















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
whatsapp-icon Back to top