Back
2016 Supreme(Mad) 373
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
A.SELVAM and G.CHOCKALINGAM, JJ.
Mathivanan @ Sathish - Appellant
Vs.
State rep.by Inspector of Police – Respondents
Crl.A.(MD)No.328 of 2013
Decided On : 24-03-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.Ajmalkhan Senior Counsel
For the Respondent: Mr.T.Mohan Addl.Public Prosecutor
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 304(b), 302 and 498(A) – Appeal Against conviction - Offence of murder - Demand of dowry - Intention to murder - Prosecution is that accused 2 and 3 namely are parents of first accused - First accused has married deceased by name prior to four years from of occurrence - At time of marriage parents of deceased have given gold jewels and other household articles - After marriage deceased and accused have lived in a joint family - First accused has run an auto electrical shop - For purpose of extending his business he directed deceased to get a sum of from her parents of deceased have refused to concede demand put forth on side of first accused and due to that all accused have joined together and tortured deceased - Held, It has already been pointed out that with regard to demand of dowry PW1 has given clinching evidence. But the trial Court has failed to appreciate same - Even assuming that there is no specific evidence with regard to demand of dowry as pointed out earlier as per Section 106 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 entire burden lies upon appellant/first accused - But he has not discharged same and further even if Ex.P8 extra judicial confession statement is inadmissible in evidence as pointed out in many places first accused has not discharged his burden as contemplated under said Section - Therefore it is needless to say that appellant/first accused has committed murder - Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
A.SELVAM, J.
This Criminal Appeal has been directed against the conviction and sentence dated 10.10.2013 passed in Sessions Case No.44 of 2012 by the Additional District and Sessions Court, Theni at Periyakulam.
2. The epitome of the case of the prosecution is that the accused 2 and 3 namely Chandran and Thilakavathi are the parents of the first accused viz., Mathivanan. The first accused has married the deceased by name Mariselvam prior to four years from the date of occurrence. At the time of marriage, the parents of the deceased have given Rs.15,000/-, gold jewels and other household articles. After marriage, the deceased and accused have lived in a joint family. The first accused has run an auto electrical shop. For the purpose of extending his business, he directed the deceased to get a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from her parents. The parents of the deceased have refused to concede the demand put forth on the side of the first accused and due to that all the accused have joined together and tortured the deceased. On 17.06.2010 at about 03.15 pm., with an intention to murder the deceased, in their house, the first accused has throttled the neck of the deceased and due to his overtacts, she passed away. After occurrence, the mother of the deceased by name Selvamani has given a complaint and the same has been registered in Crime No.1627 of 2010.
3. On receipt of the complaint, the Investigating Officer viz., PW10 has taken up investigation, examined connected witnesses and the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer viz., PW7 has conducted inquest and subsequently, the doctor by name Arunkumar (PW4) has conducted autopsy and he found the following external and internal injuries:
“The following antimortem injuries are noted over the body:-
Contusion of size 2 cms x 1.5 cm seen over the left side of the neck (7 cms below the left side of the mandible)
Contusion of size 2 cms x 1.5 cms seen over the right side of the neck (8 cms below the right side of the mandible)
On bloodless dissection of the neck:
There was extravasation of blood on the superficial and deep planes of the neck. Fracture of size 0.5 cm x 0.75 cm seen on the right side of the hyoid bone with the surrounding bruise injuring the underlying muscles, vessels and nerves.
Other findings:
Peritoneal cavity and pleural cavities - empty, pericardium contains 15 ml of straw coloured fluid - heart - right side fluid blood, left side empty; coronaries patent. Lungs, liver, spleen and kidneys - cut section congested. Larynx and trachea - normal; hyoid bone - described in the injury column. Stomach - empty; nil specific smell, mucosa - normal. Small intestine contains 10 ml of hile stained fluid; nil specific smell, mucosa - normal. Bladder - empty; Uterus normal size, cut section empty. Brain – surface vessels and cut section congested.”
4. The post-mortem certificate has been marked as Ex.P2. The Investigating Officer has continued investigation and after completing the same, laid a final report on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Theni and the same has been taken on file in PRC No.29 of 2011.
5. The Judicial Magistrate, Theni after considering the fact that the offences alleged to have been committed by the accused are triable by Sessions Court, has committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Theni Division and taken on file in Sessions Case No.44 of 2012 and subsequently made over to the trial Court.
6. The trial Court after hearing arguments of both sides and after perusing relevant records, has framed first charge against all the accused under Section 498(A); second charge against the first accused under Section 302 and third charge against all the accused under Section 304(b) of the Indian Penal Code and the same have been read over and explained to them. The accused have denied the charges and claimed to be tried.
7. On the side of the prosecution PWs.1 to 12 have been examined and Exs.P1 to P14 and M.Os.1 and 2 have been marked.
8. When the accused have been questioned und
