Back
2021 Supreme(Mad) 3025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.N. PRAKASH, R.N. MANJULA, JJ.
Sakthivel - Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thirupathur Taluk Police Station, Vellore - Respondent
Crl. A. No. 325 of 2020
Decided On : 27-08-2021
For the Appellant : Mr. M.R. Thangavel.
For the Respondents: Mr. M. Babu Muthu Meeran, Additional Public Prosecutor.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code , 1860 - Sections 449, 302, 392 r/w 397, 379 - Criminal Appeal – Offence of Murder – Robbery - Deceased were couples and they lived in Village - On night , accused trespassed into their house with an intention to commit robbery, attacked repeatedly on their head with wooden pounder and killed both of them and then robbed gold studs, gold thali and a golden coin roped in thali wore by deceased Meena, totally measuring an approximate 1 1/2 sovereign and thus, committed offences punishable under Sections 449, 302(2 counts) and 392 r/w 397 IPC - On receiving a complaint from son of deceased, a case was registered in Crime under Sections 302 & 379 IPC - After completing te investigation, charge sheet was filed against accused under Sections 449, 302(2 counts) & 392 r/w 397 IPC. After case was committed from Judicial Magistrate II case has been taken on file and after observing all legal mandates, charges have been framed under Sections 449, 302(2 counts) and 392 r/w 397(2) IPC and convicted him - Whether conviction and sentence of accused for the offences under Sections 449, 302(2 counts) and 392 r/w 397(2 counts) by the learned trial Court by recording guilt of accused for said offences on basis of evidence available on record is fair and proper – Held, It has been already dealt at length about impossibility of accused to go pawnbroker’s shop , which is a Sunday and on which day shop was closed. contrary facts revealed from evidence of witnesses with regard to date of arrest of accused and unusual type of removal of a single stud alone from ears of deceased Meena in a case for murder for gain etc., will also weaken chain of circumstances - learned trial Judge has omitted to appreciate circumstantial evidence on touchstone of above said 5 golden principles laid down by the Supreme Court, before recording guilt of accused - Had he done so, he could have seen break of links which led to disruption in chain of circumstances - In absence of such an exercise, holding of accused guilty on basis of these circumstantial evidences cannot be upheld - So, Court feel that it is a fit case which warrants our interference - Criminal Appeal is allowed.
JUDGMENT :
R.N. Manjula, J.
(Heard through Video Conferencing)
This Criminal Appeal is filed praying to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethi Mandram (FTC), Vellore, made in S.C.No.25 of 2016 by a judgement dated 08.11.2019.
2. The facts of the case:-
The deceased Rajendiran and Meena were couples and they lived in Thamanur Village, Thirupattur Taluk. On the night of 03.01.2015, the accused trespassed into their house with an intention to commit robbery, attacked repeatedly on their head with the wooden pounder and killed both of them and then robbed the gold studs, gold thali and a golden coin roped in the thali wore by the deceased Meena, totally measuring an approximate 1 1/2 sovereign and thus, committed the offences punishable under Sections 449, 302(2 counts) and 392 r/w 397 IPC. On receiving a complaint from the son of the deceased, a case was registered in Crime No.6 of 2015 under Sections 302 & 379 IPC. After completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused under Sections 449, 302(2 counts) & 392 r/w 397 IPC. After the case was committed from the Judicial Magistrate II, Thirupattur in PRC.No.11 of 2015, the case has been taken on file and after observing all legal mandates, charges have been framed under Sections 449, 302(2 counts) and 392 r/w 397(2) IPC and convicted him.
2.1 On the side of the prosecution, 13 witnesses have been examined as P.W.1 to P.W.13 and Exs.P1 to P19 and M.O.1 to M.O.21 were marked. On the side of the defendant, no witness has been examined and no documents were marked. After appreciating the evidence on record, the learned trial Judge found the accused guilty for the offences under Sections 449, 302(2 counts) and 392 r/w 397(2 counts) IPC. The details of the conviction imposed on the accused are as under:-
| S.No. | Provisions under which convicted | Sentence |
| 1. | Section 449 | 5 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 3 months rigorous imprisonment. |
| 2. | Section 302 (2 counts) | for each count one life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 3 months rigorous imprisonment. |
| 3. | Section 392 r/w 397 (2 counts) | for each count 7 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 3 months rigorous imprisonment. |
2.2 Aggrieved over that, the accused has filed this Criminal Appeal.
3. The case of the prosecution as it appears from the evidence of the witnesses in brief:-
The sons of the deceased have been working in Bangalore as a construction labourer. On 03.01.2015, the son of the deceased by name Sivakumar (P.W.1), returned from Bangalore to his native place; after he reached Thirupattur, he went to his mother-in-law's house and Nandivattam Village and stayed that night. On the next day morning, at about 8.15 am, he came to Thamanur Village to see his parents; when he went to his house, he found his father and mother dead with blood injuries and the jewels wore by his mother on her ears and neck went missing. He went to the Police Station and lodged the complaint (Ex.P1) on 07.01.2015. After the Police traced the accused and recovered the jewels robbed by him, PW1 identified the jewels (M.O.1 to M.O.5).
3.1 P.W.2 – Dr. K.M. Sivakumar, conducted the post-mortem on the bodies of the deceased on 05.01.2015, at Thirupattur Government Hospital. He noticed the following injuries on the bodies of the deceased Ranjendiran and Meena:-
Rajendiran
Appearance found at the post-mortem : Moderate built old male body lying on its back.
External injuries :- 10 cm x 1 cm with 6 cm length red brown colour contusion front of neck.
3x3 cm laceration wound just below left ear
4x4 cm and 3x3 cm two separated laceration wound left side scalp with exposing // left parietal bone.
Multiple lacerated injury 4 (four) in No. each 2x4 cm irregular lacerated wound front
