Back
2020 Supreme(Mad) 490
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
B. PUGALENDHI, J.
Balamurugan – Appellant
Versus
State represented by The Inspector of Police, Sivagangai District – Respondent
Crl.A(MD)No. 39 of 2015
Decided on : 08-09-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mohideen Basha, Advocate.
For the Respondent:A. Robinson, Government Advocate [Crl Side].
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 304(II) IPC - [SUBJECT] - SECTIONS 341, 302 AND 394 R/W 397 IPC - [ACT SECTION LIST] - THE TRIAL COURT FOUND THE APPELLANT GUILTY FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 341 AND 304(II) IPC, CONVICTED AND SENTENCED HIM TO UNDERGO 5 YEARS RIGOROUS IMPRISONMENT, WITH A FINE OF RS.5000/- IN DEFAULT TO UNDERGO TWO MONTHS SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 304(II) IPC AND NO SEPARATE SENTENCE WAS IMPOSED FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 341 IPC. THE APPELLANT WAS ACQUITTED FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 394 R/W 397 IPC. THE APPELLANT WAS CHARGED WITH MURDERING THE DECEASED BY STABBING HIM ON HIS CHEST, STOMACH AND ON ELBOW. THE APPELLANT WAS ARRESTED BASED ON HIS EXTRA JUDICIAL CONFESSION STATEMENT. THE APPELLANT WAS IDENTIFIED BY THE WIFE OF THE DECEASED IN A TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE. THE APPELLANT WAS CONVICTED BASED ON THE EVIDENCE OF THE WIFE OF THE DECEASED, THE EXTRA JUDICIAL CONFESSION STATEMENT AND THE RECOVERY OF THE KNIFE AND A MOBILE PHONE FROM THE APPELLANT. THE HIGH COURT, HOWEVER, FOUND SEVERAL LAPSES IN THE INVESTIGATION AND ACQUITTED THE APPELLANT. THE HIGH COURT ALSO DIRECTED THE STATE TO TAKE STEPS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF INVESTIGATION AND TO ENSURE THAT INNOCENT PERSONS ARE NOT WRONGFULLY PROSECUTED.
Fact of the Case:
THE DECEASED WAS MURDERED BY STABBING HIM ON HIS CHEST, STOMACH AND ON ELBOW. THE APPELLANT WAS ARRESTED BASED ON HIS EXTRA JUDICIAL CONFESSION STATEMENT. THE APPELLANT WAS IDENTIFIED BY THE WIFE OF THE DECEASED IN A TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE. THE APPELLANT WAS CONVICTED BASED ON THE EVIDENCE OF THE WIFE OF THE DECEASED, THE EXTRA JUDICIAL CONFESSION STATEMENT AND THE RECOVERY OF THE KNIFE AND A MOBILE PHONE FROM THE APPELLANT.
Finding of the Court:
THE HIGH COURT FOUND SEVERAL LAPSES IN THE INVESTIGATION AND ACQUITTED THE APPELLANT. THE HIGH COURT ALSO DIRECTED THE STATE TO TAKE STEPS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF INVESTIGATION AND TO ENSURE THAT INNOCENT PERSONS ARE NOT WRONGFULLY PROSECUTED.
Issues: None
Ratio Decidendi: None
Final Decision: APPEAL ALLOWED. CONVICTION AND SENTENCE SET ASIDE. APPELLANT ACQUITTED.
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records in S.C.No. 85 of 2011 dated 21.11.2014 on the file of the District and Sessions judge, Sivagangai, set aside the same, acquit the appellate/accused herein.)
The Criminal Appeal is filed by the sole accused in S.C.No.85 of 2011 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Sivagangai.
2. The Inspector of Police, Thirupachethi Police Station/respondent herein filed a final report as against this appellant on 21.10.2010 for the offence under Sections 341, 302 and 394 r/w 397 IPC. The trial Court has also framed charges for the said offences and in conclusion of the trial, found him not guilty for the offence under Section 394 r/w 397 IPC, but found him guilty for the offence under Section 341 and 304 (ii) IPC, convicted and sentenced him to undergo 5 years Rigorous imprisonment, with a fine of Rs.5000/- in default to undergo two months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 304(ii) IPC and no separate sentence was imposed for the offence under Section 341 IPC.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the deceased Senthil is a native of Mathur village and there was a property dispute between him and the family of one Ponnusamy. The deceased Senthil sold one of his properties to some third party and on 06.05.2010, while on the way to register the documents at the Sub Registrar Office, Sivagangai, one Karuppasamy S/o.Ponnusamy; Ponnusamy's brothers Udayar and Jeyaraman; and one Sabarimalai have raised an issue with the deceased that they are having right over Senthil's property. On 07.05.2010, the wife of Senthil, Annalakshmi [PW1] was suffering from fever and therefore, the deceased Senthil took his wife to the hospital at Kalloorani for treatment. After taking treatment, they were returning by walk near Anicut around 12.30pm, where the aforesaid Karuppasamy, S/o.Ponnusamy, Udayar, Jeyaraman and Sabarimalai surrounded the deceased Senthil and the said Karuppasamay by saying that if he is alive only, he will sell the property, stabbed the deceased Senthil on his chest, stomach and on elbow and at that time the accused Jeyaraman and Udayar caught hold of the deceased and the said Sabarimalai was holding him from back. Immediately, PW1 took the deceased with injuries to the house of one Jeyaraman and arranged for an Auto and also informed her mother-in-law [PW4]. All of them took the deceased to the Government Hospital, Sivagangai at about 1.45pm, but the Doctor, who attended the deceased reported he was brought dead.
4. On the intimation from the Government Hospital, Sivagangai, the Sub Inspector of Police, Gurusamy [PW10] went to the Government Hospital at Sivagangai, recorded the statement of the deceased's wife Annalakshmi [PW1] on 07.05.2010 at about 4.00pm, returned to Thirupachethi Police Station and registered a case in Crime No.62 of 2010 as against the above four named accused for the offence under Sections 342 and 302 IPC at about 5.30pm. The printed FIR [ExP9] was also despatched to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai, who received the same at 10.50pm on 07.05.2010 itself.
5. N.Muthukumar [PW12], Inspector of Police, Thirupachethi Police Station, on receipt of the information, proceeded to the place of occurrence, prepared an observation mahazar [ExP2] at about 8.30pm in the presence of one Annadurai and Durairaj [PW5] and also recovered soil with and without blood [MO3 and MO4 respectively] under a cover of mahazar [ExP3] in the presence of the said witnesses. Thereafter, he proceeded to the Government Hospital, Sivagangai, where the dead body was lying, conducted an inquest in the presence of one Gopal, Panchyat President of Mathur, Nagaraj, S/o. Karupasamy Servai, Velusamy, S/o. Gandhi of Mathur Village, Kumar, S/o. Udayar on the same day and all these witnesses also informed the in
