Back
2016 Supreme(Mad) 3191
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. NAGAMUTHU AND M.V.MURALIDARAN, JJ.
Sundarraj @ Raja - Appellant
Vs.
State, represented by Inspector of Police, Kallidaikurichi Police Station, Tirunelveli District. - Respondent
CRL.A (MD).No.201 of 2015
Decided On : 05-10-2016
For the Appellant : Mr. V.Kathirvel Senior Counsel Mr. K.Prabhu
For the Respondent: Mr. K.S. Duraipandian Adv.
The prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the reliability of witnesses is crucial in establishing guilt.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code - Murder - Sections 294(b), 302, 506(ii) - The court acquitted the accused based on the failure of the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and the inconsistencies in the evidence presented.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of his sister's husband. The prosecution alleged that the appellant stabbed the deceased following a quarrel between the deceased and the appellant's sister. The witnesses presented by the prosecution were found to be unreliable by the court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and that the witnesses presented by the prosecution were unreliable.
Issues: Reliability of witnesses, promptness of the First Information Report, and inconsistencies in the evidence presented by the prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution's case was not proven beyond reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies in the evidence and the unreliability of the witnesses.
Final Decision: The appellant was acquitted, and any fine paid by the appellant was ordered to be refunded. The bail bond executed by the appellant and the sureties was terminated.
S. NAGAMUTHU, J.
The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.375 of 2011, on the file of the learned First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli. He stood charged for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 302 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code. By Judgment dated 04.08.2015, the Trial Court convicted the accused, as detailed below:-
Section of Law
Sentence
Fine amount
294(b)IPC
To undergo simple imprisonment for one week.
No fine.
506(ii) IPC
To undergo simple imprisonment for six months.
No fine.
302 IPC
To undergo imprisonment for life.
Rs.1,000/-in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.
However, the Trial Court has acquitted the accused from the charge under Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code. The sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant has come up with this Criminal Appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:-
The deceased, in this case, was one Mr.Sankaranarayanan. He was a resident of Vayiravikulam Village in Tirunelveli. His wife was Mrs.Anitha. The accused is none else than the brother of Mrs.Anitha. Out of the wedlock between the deceased and Mrs.Anitha, they had two children. It is alleged that few days before the occurrence, when Mrs.Anitha served coffee to her son, by accident, it fell on the shoulder of her son. This resulted in injuries to him. The deceased found fault with Mrs.Anitha and scolded her for her negligence. This resulted in a quarrel between her and the deceased.
2.1. Depressed over the said quarrel, it is alleged that Mrs.Anitha consumed sleeping tablets in excess, on 16.12.2010 around 12.00 noon. Her father-in-law took her immediately to the hospital and admitted her as a patient. This was informed to the accused and the other family members. The accused rushed to the hospital and then, on returning to the house of the deceased, on finding the father of the deceased, he scolded him and also warned that in the event anything happened to his sister - Mrs.Anitha, he would not spare the deceased. Then, the accused left the house of the deceased. At that time, the deceased was not at h me. When he returned home, his father informed him about the above occurrence. The deceased got wild. He removed all the belongings of her wife - Mrs. Anitha and dropped them at the house of the accused, along with his wife. This further infuriated the accused.
2.2. It is alleged that on 17.12.2010, around 09.50 AM, the deceased was proceeding towards east, on the Kallidaikurichi Main Road. When he was nearing a shop, known as "Chennai Musical Shop", the accused suddenly emerged there. He intercepted the deceased, scolded him in filthy language and pointed out the incident, which forced his sister to consume sleeping tablets in excess. It is alleged that in the said quarrel, the accused took out a knife and stabbed the deceased repeatedly. The deceased fell down. PW-1 to PW-4, who were present at the scene of occurrence, raised alarm. The accused ran away from the scene of occurrence with the knife. The deceased succumbed to the injuries instantaneously. Thereafter, PW-1 went to the Kallidaikurichi Police Station and made a complaint at 10.30 AM, on 17.12.2010. On the said complaint, PW-14, the then Sub-Inspector of Police, registered a case in Crime No.289 of 2010, under Sections 294(b), 302 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code. EXP1 is the complaint and EX-P15 is the First Information Report. Then, he forwarded both the documents to the Court and handed over the investigation to the Inspector of Police.
2.3. Taking up the case for investigation, at 11.30 AM, on 17.12.2010, PW-15 proceeded to the place of occurrence, prepared an Observation Mahazer and a Rough Sketch, showing
