Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. VAIDYANATHAN, N. ANAND VENKATESH, JJ.
Marimuthu - Appellant
Versus
State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Tirunelveli District - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (MD) No. 29 of 2018
Decided On : 05-11-2019
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 304 , 300 , 299 , 342 and 302 - Criminal Procedure Code , 1973 - Section 209 - Section 313 - Section 374 - Case of prosecution in nutshell was that Appellant / accused and deceased are co-brothers and accused, having suspected that deceased had developed an illegal intimacy with his wife, had dragged deceased into his house, when deceased was walking through street in front of his house along with his wife - It was alleged by wife of deceased that accused, after pulling deceased inside his house, had dashed his head on floor upwards and hit face of deceased with a grinding stone and thereby he caused death of deceased - Thereafter, accused escaped from scene of occurrence by jumping over backside wall - It was further alleged that when she along with who are daughter and son of deceased, went inside house after breaking open same, it was found that deceased was lying with severe injuries – Thereafter and her daughter went to Police Station to prefer a complaint to Sub-Inspector of Police - Based on complaint received as FIR was registered in Crime for offences and same was forwarded to Court of Judicial Magistrate through a Police Constable – Held , To bring case under above exception, first stage is to see if accused has done any act, which has caused death - Once Court is satisfied with first stage, it leads to second stage in order to see if act of accused person amounts to “culpable homicide” as defined and if answer of this question is found in affirmative, Court has to reach next stage to consider operation and see if act can be brought under any one of four limbs - If answer for this question is in negative, offence would be culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under first and second part - If question is found to be positive, then Court has to see if act comes within any of exceptions enumerated and if it falls under exception, it will again come within category of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, punishable - With above background, if we analyze present case on hand, it could be easily presumed that act of maintaining adultery by deceased with appellants wife, would have certainly been lingering in mind of appellant / accused for quite sometime and tormenting him continuously, which, at one point of time, made him to lose his self-control and made his mind to go astray, thereby causing death of deceased by attacking him with grinding stone - It is found that appellant had not voluntarily provoked himself and there were obviously incidents / occurrences, on account of illegal relationship between deceased and wife of appellant and there were also earlier fights between parties for a very long time, which is evident from depositions - Therefore, this Court is convinced that facts of present case falls under Exception on ground of “sustained provocation” and consequently, it is a culpable homicide not amounting to murder - Appeal is allowed
JUDGMENT :
S. Vaidyanathan, N. Anand Venkatesh, JJ.
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in S.C.No.277 of 2016 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District and set aside the judgment dated 31.10.2017 and acquit the appellant of the charges leveled against him.)
“Murder is an inherently evil act, no matter what the circumstances, no matter how convincing the rationalization.”
- The Appellant herein, who is the Sole Accused in S.C.No.277 of 2016 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District, stands convicted by the Trial Court for offences under Sections 342 and 302 IPC as follows:
| Sl.No. | Conviction | Sentence |
| 1. | Section 342 IPC | To undergo six months Simple Imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- in default to pay fine to undergo Simple Imprisonment for One Month. |
| 2. | Section 302 IPC | To undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to pay fine to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three Months. |
2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that the Appellant / accused and the deceased Sivanar are co-brothers and on 17.07.2015 at about 09.15pm, the accused, having suspected that the deceased had developed an illegal intimacy with his wife, had dragged the deceased into his house, when the deceased was walking through the street in front of his house along with his wife. It was alleged by the wife of the deceased / P.W.1 that the accused, after pulling the deceased inside his house, had dashed his head on the floor upwards and hit the face of the deceased with a grinding stone and thereby he caused the death of the deceased. Thereafter, the accused escaped from the scene of occurrence by jumping over the backside wall. It was further alleged by P.W.1 that when she along with P.Ws.3 and 4, who are the daughter and the son of the deceased, went inside the house after breaking open the same, it was found that the deceased was lying with severe injuries. Thereafter, P.W.1 and her daughter (P.W.3) went to the Police Station to prefer a complaint (Ex.P.1) to the Sub-Inspector of Police (P.W.17) at about 23.30 hours on 17.07.2015. Based on the complaint received from P.W.1, an FIR was registered (Ex.P.16) in Crime No.79 of 2015 for offences under Sections 342 and 302 IPC and the same was forwarded to the Court of Judicial Magistrate through P.W.14, a Police Constable.
3. The Inspector of Police (P.W.18), after receipt of the FIR had visited the scene of crime and conducted an inquest on the dead body of the deceased and prepared the Inquest Report (Ex.P.20) and subsequently, forwarded the dead body of the deceased to Tirunelveli Medical College Hospital for conducting Postmortem.
4. On 21.07.2015, the accused had surrendered before the Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai and pursuant to the grant of Police custody, the accused was interrogated by P.W.18 in the presence of P.Ws.11 and 12 and the accused had made a voluntary disclosure statement (Ex.P.21), on the basis of which, the Material Objects in M.Os.4 and 5, which were bloodstained shirt and lungi respectively, hidden near a Water Tank, were recovered.
5. On completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was laid before the Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi in P.R.C.No.68 of 2015 and was subsequently, committed to the Court of Sessions as per Section 209 Cr.P.C. for trial, which was taken on file in S.C.No.277 of 2016. The prosecution, in order to subs
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
