Back
2016 Supreme(Mad) 465
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. JAICHANDREN & S. NAGAMUTHU, JJ.
Raja & Others – Appellants
Vs.
State Represented by Inspector of Police, Vishnukanchi Police Station – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 204 of 2012
Decided On : 03-02-2016
For the Appellant : Mr. V. Gopinath and Mr. T. Vijayaraghavan.
For the Respondent: Mr. M. Maharaja, Additional Public Prosecutor.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and failure to do so can result in the acquittal of the accused.
Headnote:
Murder - Real Estate Business - Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Section 147, Section 148, Section 302, Section 149 - The judgment discusses the charges against the accused, the evidence presented, contradictions in witness testimonies, and the delay in filing the First Information Report. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the murder of a real estate businessman, with six accused charged for various offenses under the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution presented witness testimonies and evidence to establish the guilt of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found material contradictions in witness testimonies, delay in filing the First Information Report, and suppressed information, leading to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Issues: The issues revolved around the reliability of witness testimonies, the delay in filing the First Information Report, and the contradictions in the evidence presented by the prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution's failure to explain the delay in filing the First Information Report, along with material contradictions in witness testimonies, undermined the case against the accused, leading to their acquittal.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the accused, set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court, and ordered the refund of any paid fines and discharge of bail bonds.
S. NAGAMUTHU, J.
1. The appellants are the accused Nos. 2, 5 and 6 in S.C. No. 65 of 2010 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Sessions Court No. II, Kancheepuram and they along with accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 stood charged for the offences as detailed below:-
| S. No. | Charge No. | Rank of Accused | Charged for the Offence |
| 1. | Charge No. 1 | Accused Nos. 5 & 6 | U/s. 147 IPC |
| 2. | Charge No. 2 | Accused Nos. 1 to 4 | U/s. 148 IPC |
| 3. | Charge No. 3 | Accused Nos. 1 to 5 | U/s. 302 IPC |
| 4. | Charge No. 4 | Accused No. 6 | U/s. 302 r/w. 149 IPC |
During the pendency of the trial, the accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 died and therefore, the charges against them abated. Thus, the accused Nos. 2, 5 and 6, who were the appellants, alone faced the trial. By judgment, dated 28.02.2012, the Trial Court convicted the appellant Nos. 2, 5 and 6 and sentenced them as detailed below:-
| S. No. | Rank of Accused | Conviction | Sentence |
| 1.
| Accused Nos. 2, 5, 6 | U/s. 147 IPC | To undergo two years Simple Imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default to undergo six months Simple Imprisonment. |
| 2. | Accused Nos. 2, 5, 6 | U/s. 148 IPC | To undergo Simple Imprisonment for three years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default to undergo six months Simple Imprisonment. |
| 3. | Accused Nos. 2 & 5 | U/s. 302 IPC | To undergo Imprisonment for Life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default to undergo six months Rigorous Imprisonment. |
| 4. | Accused No. 6 | U/s. 302 r/w.149 IPC | To undergo Imprisonment for Life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default to undergo six months Rigorous Imprisonment. |
The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Challenging the said judgment of conviction and sentence dated 28.02.2012, the appellants are before this Court with this appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:-
(i) The deceased in this case was one Mr. Babu. P.W.1-Jayagandhi is his wife. The deceased was doing Real Estate Business in Chinna Kancheepuram Village. On account of the said Real Estate Business, there was enmity between the accused Nos. 1 and 2 and the deceased. This is stated to be the motive for the accused Nos. 1 and 2 to commit the murder of the deceased.
(ii) On 17.02.2009, at about 7.45 p.m., when the deceased was nearing the junction of Tumbavanam Street, Puthutheru at Chinna Kancheepuram Village, it is alleged that all the six accused came there in an auto bearing Registration No. TN-05-4530, armed with deadly weapons. The 1st accused was having a patta knife; the 2nd accused was having an iron rod; the 3rd accused was having a cycle pump; the 4th accused was having an iron rod; and the accused Nos. 5 and 6 were not armed with any weapon. It is stated that all the accused attacked the deceased with their respective weapon, indiscriminately. The deceased sustained serious injuries and fell down in a pool of blood. All the accused fled away from the scene of occurrence. The occurrence was witnessed by P.Ws. 1 and 9 and many more persons. Since the deceased was still alive, P.W.1 immediately took him to the Government Hospital at Kancheepuram. After giving first aid treatment, the Doctor advised P.W.1 to take the deceased to the Government General Hospital at Chennai. But, on the way the deceased succumbed to the injuries. Therefore, the dead body was brought back to the Government Hospital at Kancheepuram and kept in the mortuary.
(iii) P.W.1 went to Vishnukanchi Police Station on 17.02.2009, at 11.30 p.m., and made a complaint under Ex.P.1. P.W.8-Ms.Amudha, the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Vishnukanchi Police Station, received the complaint at 11.30 p.m. and registered a case in Crime No. 93 of 2009 under Sections 294(b), 341, 324 and 302 IPC. Ex.P.4 is the First Information Report. He forwarded both the documents to Court and handed over the
