IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. SUDHAKAR, P.N. PRAKASH, JJ.
K. Ramajayam @ Appu - Appellant
Vs.
The Inspector of Police - Respondent
Referred Trial No.1 of 2015 Criminal Appeal No.110 of 2015
Decided on : 27-1-2016
Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 366 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 r/w 380 - Information and Technology Act, 2000 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 3- Seeking confirmation of capital punishment – Criminal Trial – Offence of Murder – Conviction – Challenged - Deceased opened shop around 8.00 a.m. At about 9.00 a.m. (PW-1) came there and after being there for some time, he left for other work - When he returned to shop around 12.00 noon, he was shocked to see his younger brother lying dead in a pool of blood - PW-1 raised an alarm, hearing which (PW-2), (PW-3) and PW4), who are all adjacent shop owners, came to spot - Held, There was no necessity to take away the life of Gunaram, if robbery had been the motive - Keeping in mind the macabre nature of crime, court view that sentences imposed on accused should run consecutively and not concurrently - Recently, Constitution Bench of Supreme Court in Union of India v. Sriharan @ Murugan, (2015 (13) Scale 165) has held that Court, while sentencing an accused to imprisonment, can direct that he should suffer incarceration for a minimum period without statutory remission or commutation – It will also help the Police to conduct case study and hone their investigation skills - Therefore, court direct the Director General of Police to depute an Officer of the rank of Superintendent of Police from Police Training College to collect the DVR (MO-2) from trial Court and preserve same in an anti-static cover in Police Museum - If any appeal is preferred against this judgment and the Supreme Court calls for the DVR (MO-2), the same shall be sent forthwith - With above modification in sentence and directions, Crl.A.No.110 of 2015 is dismissed and R.T.No.1 of 2015 is answered accordingly – Order accordingly.
P.N. Prakash, J.
The Reference, R.T.No.1 of 2015 is made by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur @ Poonamallee, under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking confirmation of the capital punishment imposed upon K.Ramajayam @ Appu, the sole accused, by Judgment dated 21.1.2015 in S.C.No.142 of 2013. The accused has independently preferred Crl.A.No.110 of 2015, challenging the conviction and sentence.
2. The case of the Prosecution culled out from the materials on record is as follows:
(a) Dhanaram (PW-1) and his deceased younger brother Gunaram were running a Pawn Broking & Jewellery Shop in the name and style of 'Balaji Pawn Brokers' at No.1, 13th Street, Sakthi Nagar, the place of occurrence.
(b) On 14.4.2012, the deceased Gunaram opened the shop around 8.00 a.m. At about 9.00 a.m. Dhanaram (PW-1) came there and after being there for some time, he left for other work. When he returned to the shop around 12.00 noon, he was shocked to see his younger brother Gunaram lying dead in a pool of blood. PW-1 raised an alarm, hearing which Sahadev Prohit (PW-2), Varadarajan (PW-3) and Selvi (PW4), who are all adjacent shop owners, came to the spot. On information, the Police also arrived soon.
(c) On the complaint (Ex.P-1) given by Dhanaram (PW-1), John Arumairaj, (PW-28) Inspector of Police, T-4 Maduravoyal Police Station registered a case in Cr.No.491 of 2012 at 2.00 p.m on 14.4.2012 for the offences under Section 302 read with 380 IPC. The complaint (Ex.P-1) and the FIR (Ex.P-17) reached the jurisdictional Magistrate on 14.4.2012 at 7.00 p.m., as could be seen from the endorsement made therein.
(d) In the complaint (Ex.P-1) given to the Police, Dhanaram (PW1) has stated that on 23.10.2011 when Gunaram was in the shop, someone had sprayed an anaesthetic substance, and had burgled around 935 grams of jewellery in connection with which a case in Maduravoyal Police Station Cr.No.986 of 2011 has been registered. The lost jewellery belonged to one Kalyanmal Ranka (PW-15), and he (PW-15) suspected some foulplay by Gunaram and that he must have hired a killer to do the job.
(e) Dhanaram (PW-1) was in such a state of shock that he was unable to give the details of the lost jewels to the Police. Hence, Bawarlal (PW-11), who also has a Pawn shop nearby, and is known to Dhanaram (PW-1), took stock of the items and reported that seven items weighing 48 grams were missing. When Bawarlal (PW-11) informed this, Dhanaram (PW-1) told him that from the Video recordings shown to him by the Police, it appears that the intruder has taken only the covering jewellery.
(f) John Arumairaj (PW-28) went to the scene of occurrence and in the presence of witnesses Vimal (not examined) and Muthu (PW-8), prepared an Observation Mahazar (Ex.P-18) and a Rough Sketch (Ex.P-19). Luckily for the Police, but unfortunately for the accused, CCTV cameras were installed in the shop, the presence of which has been referred to in the Observation Mahazar (Ex.P-18).
(g) PW-28 requisitioned the services of the Forensic Expert from the mobile unit of the Tamil Nadu Forensic Science Department for collection of clue materials from the scene of occurrence, namely, fresh blood collected with sponge; blood stained Bed-sheet (MO-12); yellow colour Hair Comb (MO-13); and blood stained Spectacle (MO-14) under the cover of the mahazar (Ex.P-20) in the presence of Muthu (PW-8) and Vimal (not examined). The Inspector (PW-28) noticed that the body of Gunaram was with cut injuries around his neck and the locker in the shop was found opened.
(h) Ramajayam, the Finger Print Expert came to the place of occurrence, but was not able to lift any chance finger prints therefrom.
The Inspector (PW-28) requisitioned the services of Balakumar (PW-9) CCTV Camara Tech
Union of India v. Sriharan @ Murugan
B.A. Umesh v. High Court of Karnataka
Jamnadas Parashram v. The State of M.P.
Laxman v. State of Maharashtra
Umesh Kumar v. State of A.P. ((2013) 10 SCC 591)
State of M.P. through CBI, V. Paltan Mallah ((2005) 3 SCC 169
Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab (2015 (1) Scale 542)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.