IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.N. PRAKASH, R. HEMALATHA, JJ.
Periyasamy – Appellant
Versus
State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Irumbulikuritchi Police Station, Ariyalur – Respondent
Crl.A. No. 477 of 2018
Decided On : 21-12-2021
Criminal Appeal - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374 (2) – Indian Penal code, 1860 – Section- 302, 304, 326 - Appellant contended all eyewitness to occurrence are close relatives and also had contradicted each other in depositions - Public Prosecutor argued that prosecution had established guilt of appellant beyond all reasonable doubts through oral and documentary evidence – Held, This is a case where jealousy and resentment amongst siblings on distribution of property by way of partition went out of hand - From facts of case, it can be deciphered that appellant was nurturing a grouse against his own younger brother on property apportioned to latter and even approached a Civil Court where he could not succeed in litigation - A perusal of records shows that trial court framed a charge only under Section 323 IPC against present appellant and trial was conducted - Only after case was reserved for judgment, District Judge altered charge to 326 IPC and proceeded to pronounce judgment - Alteration of charge was not read over and explained to appellant as per provisions of Section 216 Cr.P.C. - This is another serious lapse on part of District and Sessions Judge - No notice / opportunity was given to accused in this regard - Hence conviction of appellant under Section 326 IPC is liable to be set aside - Appellant is found guilty of offence under Section 323 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month - Both sentences shall run concurrently - Appeal partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
R. Hemalatha, J.
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment and order dated 18.06.2018 of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ariyalur in S.C.No.74/2016.)
1. The present appeal is against the judgment and order of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ariyalur in S.C.No.74 of 2016, on 18.06.2018, in which the present appellant was convicted and sentenced as detailed hereunder:
| S.No. | Conviction | Sentence |
| 1. | U/s.326 of IPC | 5 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.3,000/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. |
The learned Sessions Judge further directed that the sentences shall run concurrently.
2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is as follows:
b) Both Rayar and Kalaiselvi (P.W.1) were rushed to Government Hospital, Jayamkondan. Dr.K.Rajarajan (P.W.16) examined P.W.1 and the deceased Rayar and gave first aid to them and referred them to Government Medical College Hospital, Thanjavur, for further treatment. The copies of Accident Registers for Kalaiselvi and Rayar were marked as Ex.P13 and Ex.P14 respectively.
c) Thiru.Rajaraman (P.W.21), Special Sub-Inspector of Police, Irumbulikuritchi Police Station, went to Government Hospital, Jayamkondan, and recorded the statement (Ex.P1) of P.W.1 and registered FIR (Ex.P17) in Crime No.41/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(ii) IPC against the appellant and his wife Rajakumari. He then went to the scene of occurrence and prepared an Observation Mahazar (Ex.P3) and a rough sketch (Ex.P18) in the presence of the witnesses Anbuselvan (P.W.10) and Seeman (not examined).
d) Kalaiselvi (P.W.1) was discharged from the hospital on 13.04.2016 and she was treated for a humerus fracture in her left arm and the wound certificate (Ex.P15) shows that her injuries were grievous in nature. It has also been mentioned in the Accident Register (Ex.P13) that P.W.1 sustained grievous injuries. However, Rayar succumbed to injuries on 24.02.2016.
e) Thiru. Bharathidasan (P.W.22), the Inspector of Police, Udaiyarpalayam Police Station, took up investigation and altered the sections of law to 294(b), 323, 324, 506 (ii) and 302 IPC and sent the alteration report (Ex.P16) to Court through Thirisangu (P.W.18) Grade–II Constable attached to Irumbulikuritchi Police Station. He conducted an inquest (Ex.P19) on the body of the deceased in the presence of Panchayatdhars and thereafter, sent the body for postmortem.
f) Thiru. Susilkumar (P.W.19), Grade –II Constable, identified the body of the deceasedto Dr.Tamilmani (P.W.15) who conducted autopsy o
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.