State represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Namakkal vs Kamaraj

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2017 Supreme(Mad) 4089

P.N.PRAKASH, C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
State represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Namakkal – Appellant
Versus
Kamaraj – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.R.Rajarathinam Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr. C. Emalias Addl. Public Prosecutor,
For the Respondent: Mr. R. Rajasekaran, Mr. M. Subash Babu

JUDGMENT :

P.N. PRAKASH, C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, JJ.

1. The reference in R.T. No.2 of 2017 has been made by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Namakkal, under Section 366 Cr.P.C., seeking confirmation of the capital punishment imposed upon Kamaraj (A2) and Elangovan (A3) vide judgment dated 02.06.2017 in S.C. No. 94 of 2012. Kamaraj (A2) and Elangovan (A3) have independently preferred Criminal Appeal Nos.465 of 2017 and 402 of 2017 respectively, challenging their convictions and sentences.

2. The case of the prosecution, culled out from the materials on record, is as follows:

2.1 This is a case of triple murder for gain. Umadevi (P.W.1) and her husband Dr. Sundaram (P.W.4) are the owners of Annai Eye Hospital and Annai Opticals in Fort Road, Namakkal. Dr.Sundaram (P.W.4) is an Ophthalmologist by profession and his wife Umadevi (P.W.1) manages the hospital. The couple live in the ground floor of the hospital and they have no children. The couple own an independent bungalow a kilometre away in Mullai Nagar. The father of Umadevi (P.W.1) died sometime in 1977 leaving behin

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2017 Supreme(Mad) 4089

P.N.PRAKASH, C.V.KARTHIKEYANState represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Namakkal – AppellantVersusKamaraj – Respondent

Cases Referred (15)

P.N.PRAKASH, C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
State represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Namakkal – Appellant
Versus
Kamaraj – Respondent