Back
2017 Supreme(Mad) 97
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. NAGAMUTHU, N. AUTHINATHAN, JJ.
C. Boopathy - Appellant
Vs.
State by The Inspector of Police, Pollachi Taluk - Respondent
Crl. A. No. 385 of 2016
Decided On : 09-01-2017
For the Appellant : Mr. M.H. Abdur Rahman
For the Respondent: Mr. P. Govindarajan
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on credible evidence, including eye-witness accounts and motive, to uphold a conviction for murder under IPC.
Headnote:
IPC - Murder - Section 302, Section 309 - Summary: The court discussed the prosecution's case, the eye-witness accounts, the motive, and the injuries sustained by the accused. It found the prosecution's evidence to be convincing and upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for offences under Sections 302 and 309 of IPC for murdering a woman who had complained about his stalking and harassment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the prosecution's evidence, including the eye-witness accounts and the motive, to be convincing and upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the credibility of the eye-witness accounts, the establishment of motive, and the injuries sustained by the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the credible eye-witness accounts, the established motive, and the nature of the injuries sustained by the accused to uphold the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.
S. Nagamuthu, J.
The appellant is the sole accused in S.C. No. 286 of 2013 on the file of the learned Special Sessions Judge, Bomb Blast Court, Coimbatore. He stood charged for offences under Sections 302 and 309 of IPC. By judgment dated 18.12.2014, the trial court convicted him under both the charges and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 309 of IPC. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this Criminal Appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:-
(a) The deceased in this case was one Mrs. Devi @ Sulochana. She was already married, having children also. She was working in a Private Company known as Apple Package Company'' at Ayyampalayam Village in Coimbatore District. The accused used to stalk when she was proceeding to and returning from the company. The accused, made sexual overtures to her, requesting her to consent for having sex with him. The deceased warned not to behave in such manner and she also told him that she had her husband and children whose honour would also be spoiled by the conduct of the accused. But, the accused did not stop stalking the deceased.
(b) On 10.05.2011, the deceased made a complaint against the accused in respect of the abovesaid occurrence at the All Women Police Station, Pollachi. An enquiry was conducted during which the accused was warned by the police. Despite that, the accused did not stop stalking the deceased. This is stated to be the motive for the occurrence.
(c) On 28.09.2011 at 10.00 a.m., the deceased and P.Ws.1 and 2, who were co-workers, travelled in a bus and got down at the bus stop near the company where they were working. It was morning 07.30 a.m. At that time, the accused suddenly emerged at the said place from a nearby bush. He was armed with an Aruval. On reaching the deceased, he started cutting the deceased indiscriminately. He shouted at her that since she was not heeding to her request, she should die. The deceased having sustained a number of injuries, fell down. He cut himself on his head twice with the same Aruval and fell down. P.Ws.1 and 2 and others, who were in the bus stop, rescued both of them and sent them to a hospital by means of 108 Ambulance. In the hospital, the deceased after some time, succumbed to the injuries. The accused only survived.
(d) Based on the complaint made by P.W.1 at 10.30 a.m. on 28.09.2011, P.W.13, the then sub-Inspector of Police, registered a case in Cr.No.263 of 2011 under Section 302 of IPC against the accused. Ex.P.1 is the complaint and Ex.P.26 is the First Information Report. He forwarded both the documents to court which were received by the learned Magistrate at 12.00 p.m. on 28.09.2011.
(e) The case was then taken up for investigation by P.W.15. He went to the place of occurrence and prepared an Observation Mahazar and a Rough Sketch in the presence of P.W.9 and another. He also recovered the blood stained earth and sample earth under a mahazar. He examined P.Ws.1 to 4 and few more witnesses at the place of occurrence. On going over to the hospital, he conducted inquest on the body of the deceased around 03.00 p.m. and forwarded the same for postmortem.
(f) P.W.5 Doctor Jayasingh conducted autopsy on the body of the deceased on 29.09.2001 at 11.15 a.m. He found the following injuries:-
''Moderately nourished body of a female aged about 35 years. Finger and toe nails were bluish in colour. Hospital bandage noted over head and top of left shoulder. On removal,
The following ante mortem injuries noted on the body;
1. Vertically oblique cut wound 7 x 3 c.m. X muscle deep noted over front of left shoulder. The upper lateral part of sharp end of the wound is 1 c.m. In depth and the lower media
