IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.T. SELVAM, N. SATHISH KUMAR, JJ.
Josiyakara Murugesan @ Murugesan - Appellant
Versus
State rep. by, The Inspector of Police Mettur Police Station Salem District - Respondent
Crl.A. No. 278 of 2017
Decided On : 02-02-2018
Sole Accused - Criminal Law - IPC 436, 449, 302, 506[ii] - The court found the appellant guilty of offences under IPC sections 449, 302, and 506[ii], but acquitted him of the charge under section 436 IPC.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a former employee of the deceased, demanded money and set fire to a godown. He then trespassed into the deceased's house, stabbed him, and threatened witnesses. The prosecution presented eyewitnesses, medical evidence, and material object seizures.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of murder, trespass, and criminal intimidation, but acquitted him of arson due to lack of evidence.
Issues: Reliability of eyewitness testimony, presence of motive, and evidence of arson.
Ratio Decidendi: Eyewitness testimony, medical evidence, and material object seizures were crucial in establishing the guilt of the appellant for murder, trespass, and criminal intimidation.
Final Decision: The appellant's conviction and sentence for murder, trespass, and criminal intimidation were upheld, while the conviction under section 436 IPC was set aside.
N. Sathish Kumar, J.
Appellant is arrayed as the sole accused, in the case tried in SC.No.218/2014 on the file of the Court of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Salem, for offences u/s.436, 449, 302 and 506[ii] IPC. The Trial Court, under impugned Judgment dated 15.04.2016, found the appellant/accused guilty of the above said offences and awarded sentence, as follows:-
| Rank of the Accused | Conviction under section | Sentence Awarded |
| Sole Accused | 436 IPC | To undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- with a default sentence of 6 months simple imprisonment. |
|
| 449 IPC | To undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- with a default sentence of 6 months simple imprisonment. |
|
| 302 IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each, with a default sentence of 6 months simple imprisonment. |
|
| 506[ii] IPC | To undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- with a default sentence of 6 months simple imprisonment. |
The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved over the said conviction and sentence, the present appeal came to be filed by the appellant/accused.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case, are as follows:-
(a) The deceased Munichetty was a resident of Ramnagar, Mettur. He was doing “Awning Business” P.W.1-Dhandapani is his son. P.W.1 also used to help his father/deceased during weekends. The appellant/accused Josiyakara Murugesan @ Murugesan worked with the deceased for 10 to 15 years and he is a drunkard and used to demand money from the deceased frequently. Due to this character of the appellant/accused, the deceased sacked him from the work. Even after dismissal from work, the appellant/accused used to go to the deceased and demand money.
(b) On 14.03.2012 at about 4.00 p.m., while P.W.1 and the deceased were having a talk, the appellant/accused came and demanded money from the deceased. Refusing to accede the demand made by the appellant/accused, P.W.1 and deceased scolded the appellant/accused and drove away him from that place. The appellant/accused, thereafter went towards the Godown of P.W.1. Five minutes thereafter, P.W.1 heard a sound from the Godown. When P.W.1 went to terrace to see as to what had happened, he saw a fire had engulfed in the Godown. When P.W.1 came down to go to the Godown, he saw the appellant/accused pushing his father down from the cot and stabbed him with the knife [M.O.1] repeatedly. P.W.2-Pugazhenthi, P.W.3-Prasannakumar, P.W.4-Arumugam, Annapoorani and Annadurai were present at that time and they also witnessed the appellant/accused repeatedly stabbing the deceased with knife. On seeing P.Ws.1 to 4 and others, the appellant/accused threatened them with dire consequences and thereafter, left the scene of crime. Thereafter, P.W.1 took his father in an Ambulance to the hospital, where the doctor declared him dead. Immediately, P.W.1 left for police station and lodged the complaint under Ex.P.1 with P.W.16-Kesavan, Inspector of Police.
(c) P.Ws.5 to 8 had deposed about their seeing of the Godown of P.W.1 and their respective houses were destroyed in the fire. P.W.10-Manickam, Fireman attached to Mettur Thermal Fire Service Station had deposed the receipt of information about the engulfing of fire in the houses of P.Ws.5 to 8 and the “Pandhal Nilayam” run by the deceased and about the extinguishing of the same.
(d) P.W.16-Kesavan, Inspector of Police attached to Mettur Police Station, on receipt of Ex.P.1 from P.W.1 on 14.03.2012 at about 6.00 p.m., registered the crime in Cr.No.119/2012 u/s.436, 302 IPC. The Printed FIR is marked as Ex.P.12. He despatched the originals of Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.12 to the jurisdictional Court. He took the case for investigation and at about 7.45 p.m., he arrested the appellant/accused near Kamaraja
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.