Back
2016 Supreme(Mad) 643
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.JAICHANDREN AND S.NAGAMUTHU, JJ.
Azhagiri – Appellant
Vs.
State by, The Inspector of Police – Respondents
CRL.A.No.359 of 2011
Decided On : 07-03-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : M/s.Philip Ravindran Jesudoss
For the Respondent: Mr.M.Maharaja, Addl. Public Prosecutor
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 341 and 302 - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 313 - First Information Report – Appeal against Conviction - Incriminating materials - Deceased in this case was one was given in marriage to one years before occurrence and she had children born through him - While she was living with her husband deceased had developed illicit intimacy with accused - After birth of child she deserted her husband and came along with accused - From that time onwards deceased was living with accused - Husband of deceased died two years before occurrence - It is further alleged that few months before occurrence deceased on account of her displeasure over activities of accused left accused and came to the parental home and she was living with her parents - Children were also not with accused deceased was doing coolie work and maintaining family - Held, Now question is as to what was offence that accused had committed by said act - It is in the evidence that accused came and on seeing deceased he parked his cycle and came near her - Thus it is crystal clear that the meeting of accused and the deceased itself was only by chance - Therefore premeditation cannot be inferred - On seeing the deceased accused only wanted her to return to his house so as to live with him - Deceased told him that since her children had grown up it would not be possible for her to return home as it would bring shame and disregard to her children - Therefore there was a quarrel between accused and the deceased with regard to living of deceased with accused or not - It was only in said quarrel accused had taken the Saw which was there in Cycle - Accused was also proceeding for some work for which Saw was in cycle - Appeal Is Partly Allowed
S.NAGAMUTHU, J.
The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.118 of 2010 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.5, Coimbatore @ Tiruppur. He stood charged for offences under Sections 341 and 302 of IPC. By judgment dated 29.10.2010, the trial court convicted him under both the charges and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo one month simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 341 of IPC. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant/sole accused is before this Court with this appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief, is as follows:-
(a) The deceased in this case was one Eswari. Eswari was given in marriage to one Subramaniam 20 years before the occurrence and she had 3 children born through him. While she was living with her husband, the deceased had developed illicit intimacy with the accused. After the birth of the 3rd child, she deserted her husband and came along with the accused. From that time onwards, the deceased was living with the accused. The husband of the deceased died two years before the occurrence. It is further alleged that few months before the occurrence, the deceased, on account of her displeasure over the activities of the accused, left the accused and came to the parental home and she was living with her parents. The children were also not with the accused. The deceased was doing coolie work and maintaining the family.
(b) On 18.03.2009, at about 09.30 a.m., the deceased was leaving for her work site along with P.Ws.2 and 3. P.W.1, her son was also proceeding along with them as he was proceeding towards the private company where he was working. When they were walking near Pulianthope, the accused came there in a Cycle. On seeing the deceased, he parked the cycle, came near the deceased and wanted her to return to the family fold so as to live with him as she was doing previously. The deceased told him that since her children had grown up, it would be not appropriate for her to live with the accused as it would bring shame and disrespect to her children. This resulted in a wordy quarrel between the accused and the deceased for quite some time. In the course of the said quarrel, it is alleged that the accused took a Saw from the cycle and on seeing the same, when the deceased started running, the accused intercepted her, caught hold her tuft and attacked her with hands and legs on her right ear and neck. Then, with the Saw, he attacked her on the head and other parts of the body. The deceased sustained bleeding injuries and fell down. P.Ws.1 to 3 raised alarm. The accused ran away from the scene of occurrence taking the Saw. P.Ws.1 and 2 ran near the deceased and found her dead.
(c) On hearing their alarm, a huge crowd of people gathered there. One of the persons in the crowd spoke to the police over phone and informed about the occurrence. On receiving the said information, within 5 minutes thereafter, P.W.13, the then Sub-Inspector of Police, attached to Avinasipalayam Police Station, rushed to the place of occurrence and recorded the statement of P.W.1. On returning to the police station, he registered a case in Cr.No.42 of 2009 under Sections 341, 506(ii) and 302 of IPC against the accused. Ex.P.1 is the complaint and Ex.P.11 is the First Information Report. He forwarded both the documents to court which were received by the learned Judicial Magistrate at 01.00 p.m. on 18.03.2009.
(d) The case was taken up for investigation by P.W.16 the then Inspector of Police attached to Avinasipalayam Police Station. He proceeded to the place of occurrence at 12.15 p.m. He prepared an Observation Mahazar and a Rough Sketch in the presence of P.W.7 and P.W.8. Then, he recovered blood stained earth (M.O.5) and sample earth (M.O.6) from the place of occurrence. He conducted in
