SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Mad) 832

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. NAGAMUTHU, N. SESHASAYEE, JJ.
N. Banu & Ors. - Appellants
Vs.
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by The Inspector of Police, CB CID Metro Wing - Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 685, 689 to 693 of 2016 & 98 of 2017 And Crl. M.P. Nos. 9676, 9778 to 9782 of 2016 & 2810 of 2017
Decided On : 24-04-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. A. Ramesh for Mr. N. Chandrasekaran, Mr. N.R. Elango for Mr. R. Vivekanandan, Mr. AR.L. Sundaresan for Mrs. A.L. Ganthimathi
For the Respondent: Mr. R. Rajarathinam, Mr. P. Govindarajan
For the Intervenor : Mr. A. Thiagarjan for Mr. J. Balaji

Headnote:

Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 164, 319, 306 – Indian Penal Code - Sections 147, 148, and 302 r/w 120(b) – Offence of Murder - Purpose of executing conspiracy - Deceased in this case was one - He was married to P.W.2 For a long time, he was in employment and after demise - Deceased became personal assistant in her political activities. P.W.2 was running a primary school and the deceased was looking after same - According to the Will, the properties should be taken and P.W.2- for life and after that the said property will go to their legal heirs absolutely. Late, a leading lawyer of the Madras Bar, who was appointed as the Administrator, for some reason or the other, declined to continue as the Administrator – Held, prosecution has proved the presence and participation of accused 4 to 6 and since all these accused came to the place of occurrence with a common intention to commit the murder of the deceased in pursuance of the conspiracy, they are liable to be punished for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 r/w 120(B) I.P.C. - Quantum of punishment, having regard to the mitigating as well as the aggravating circumstance, since we are of the view that it is not a rarest of rare case, we are inclined to impose minimum punishment both for the offence of conspiracy and murder - Crl.A.No.685 of 2016 is allowed

JUDGMENT :

S. Nagamuthu, J.

Dr. M.G. Ramachandran, popularly known as “MGR” was the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu till his demise in the month of December, 1987. After his demise, for some time, his wife, Mrs. Janaki Ammal was in politics leading the political party founded by Dr. MGR.

2. Mrs. Janaki Ammal had a brother by name Mr. Mani @ Narayanan. Mr. Narayanan had seven children, who were all well settled in life. P.W.15 Mrs. Latha Rajendran, P.W.2 Mrs. Sudha Vijayakumar and the first accused Mrs. Banu Sridhar are the daughters of Mr. Narayanan. P.W.3-Mr.Ramachandran @ Raja @ Deepan is the son of Mr. Narayanan. During the life time of Dr. MGR, P.W.15, one Geetha Madhu Mohan, P.W.2-Mrs.Sudha Vijayakumar and yet another daughter of Mr. Narayanan by name Janaki Sivaraman were all residing in the house of Dr. MGR and Mrs. Janaki Ammal at Ramavaram Gardens. P.W.3-Mr.Ramachandran @ Raja, the first accused Mrs.Banu and another daughter of Mr. Narayanan by name Manu were all residing in the house belonging to Mr. Narayanan in Lake Area at Nungambakkam.

3. The deceased in this case was one Mr. Vijayakumar. He was married to P.W.2 in the year 1980. For a long time, he was in employment and after the demise of Dr. MGR, the deceased became the personal assistant to Mrs. Janaki Ammal in her political activities. P.W.2 was running a primary school near Ramavaram Gardens and the deceased was looking after the same.

4. Dr. MGR had left behind a Will. As per the said Will, Mrs. Janaki Ammal was given life interest over the property situated in Ramavaram Gardens. After her, according to the Will, the properties should be taken by Mr. Janaki Sivaraman, Radha Gopalakrishnan, Nirmala Ravindran and P.W.2-Mrs.Sudha Vijayakumar for life and after that the said property will go to their legal heirs absolutely. Late N.C. Ragavachari, a leading lawyer of the Madras Bar, who was appointed as the Administrator, for some reason or the other, declined to continue as the Administrator and therefore as per the terms of the Will Mr. Rajendran (P.W.14), the husband of P.W.15 Mrs. Latha Rajendran, became the administrator. In due course, there arose dispute between P.W.14 and the deceased in respect of the administration of the Will. Mrs. Janaki Ammal also passed away.

5. The property dispute between the legal heirs of Mr. Narayanan landed in a number of litigations in the High Court and other Courts. Mr. Narayanan during his life time was running six educational institutions. He died in 2004. During his life time, Narayanan had appointed P.W.3 Mr. Ramachandran @ Raja @ Deepan as the sole trustee for all these schools. The first accused was the Principal of one of the schools. She had a grievance that no property of Mr. Narayanan was given to her. Therefore, she questioned the authority of P.W.3 to be the trustee of all the six schools. This again gave raise to yet another litigation between P.W.3 and the first accused. Because of these litigations, there arose a very strong enmity between P.W.3 and the first accused. The other family members, who are the legal heirs of Mr. Narayanan, also got divided on account of the above litigations. The deceased-Vijayakumar, had been aiding P.W.3, had helped him arrange advocates to represent P.W.3 in the Courts of law and was guiding P.W.3 and had been taking care of his interest in all the litigations. The first accused was enraged over the said activities of the deceased. On few occasions, she requested and even went to the extent of warning the deceased not to support P.W.3. She was under the impression that because of the full support extended by the deceased, P.W.3 was very adamant and so he was refusing to come to terms with her. This enmity is stated to be the motive for the occurrence.

6. The deceased was having his office at Bimanna Mudali Street at Alwarpet, Chennai and he was residing with P.W.2 and his son (P.W.
































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top