SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Mad) 2970

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.N. PRAKASH, R.N. MANJULA, JJ.
Ramesh S/o. Perumal & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State represented by The Assistant Commissioner of Police, L&O, North Range, Salem - Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 429, 450 and 544 of 2020
Decided On : 02-09-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. C. Emalias for Mr. F. Wellington, Mr. C. Sivakumar, Mr. E.C. Ramesh.
For the Respondent: Mr. M. Babu Muthu Meeran, Additional Public Prosecutor.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedural Code, 1973 – Section 207 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 120-B, 364, 302 IPC r/w 34, 201 - Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 30 - Criminal Appeals – Offence of Murder – Criminal Conspiracy - Deceased was married to [A1] 12 years prior to date of occurrence and through the wedlock, they were blessed with two children - After birth of second child, [A1] deserted deceased and got married to one, who died in suspicious circumstances, in connection with which, [A1] was prosecuted for murder, but, he was acquitted in that case - Whether she had observed any ante-mortem injuries, for which [PW-25] has not given any reply – Held, in cross-examination, this witness [PW-14] has clearly stated that he knows nothing about [A1]; he is the driver-cum-owner of a private car, which he uses for business purposes for ferrying customers; he is not in the business of giving out cars for hire; [A2] called for the car and he handed over the car to [A2] and left for his use; thereafter, when he did not get back the car, he strangely contacted [A1] instead of [A2]; it was [A1], who came to military road rountana and handed over the car to him - In chief-examination, he had stated that [A2] called him in afternoon to bring the car to a place near Pallipattu cremation ground - However, in cross-examination, he has stated that [A2] called him in morning and asked him to bring the car - He has categorically stated in the cross-examination , he had taken the car to place where [A2] had asked him to come - According to prosecution, car was recovered from house of Suresh [PW-14] on alleged disclosure of [A1] and not on disclosure of [A2] - Criminal Appeals are allowed.

JUDGMENT :

P.N. Prakash, J.

As all these appeals arise out of one and the same judgment, they are considered and decided by this common judgment.

2. These criminal appeals are directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 18.09.2020 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge (Special Judge of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989), Salem, in S.C.No.262 of 2015.

3. The prosecution story runs thus:

3.1. Regina (deceased) was married to Ramesh [A1] 12 years prior to the date of occurrence (date of occurrence being 30.07.2014) and through the wedlock, they were blessed with two children. After the birth of second child, Ramesh [A1] deserted Regina and got married to one Malathi. Malathi died in suspicious circumstances, in connection with which, Ramesh [A1] was prosecuted for murder, but, he was acquitted in that case. Ramesh [A1], his mother Mani [PW-1] and his sister Selvi [PW-2] were residing in Sathya Nagar, North Krishnanputhur village.

3.2. Regina was also residing nearby with her two children. Regina used to go as a daily wager in construction sites and at the relevant point of time, she is said to have worked under Balu [PW-6] and Sathish [PW-17]. Though Ramesh [A1] got estranged from Regina, the family members of Ramesh [A1] were very cordial with Regina.

3.3. It is alleged that Ramesh [A1] developed intimacy with one Thangam and wanted to get married to her. This was resented to by Regina, on account of which, it is alleged that Ramesh [A1] and Thangam had, in a quarrel, vowed to get rid of Regina. This was projected as the motive for the offence in this case.

3.4. While so, on 30.07.2014, Ramesh [A1], Ramesh (A2), Vimalraj (A3), Thangam and Vignesh (juvenile accused) met in a cremation ground outside the village in the afternoon, consumed liquor and conspired to liquidate Regina, pursuant to which, they abducted Regina from her work place in the evening in a Tata Indica car bearing Registration No.TN-55-Z-5193 [MO-16], murdered her by strangulation and discarded her body on the railway track between Minnampalli Railway Station and Salem Town Railway Station.

3.5. The body of Regina was first noticed by Govindan [PW-12], the Railway Gang Mastry, at 07.30 a.m. on 31.07.2014, who passed on the information to Rakeshkumar [PW-32], Assistant Station Master, Minnampalli Railway Station.

3.6. Inquest over the body of Regina was conducted by the railway police and the body was sent to the Government Mohan Kumaramangalam Medical College and Hospital, Salem, where the body of Regina was kept in the mortuary.

3.7. On a written complaint [Ex.P39] given by Rakeshkumar [PW-32], Assistant Station Master, which was forwarded by Jayaraman [PW-33], Assistant Manager, Salem Junction, to the railway police, a case in Salem Railway P.S.Crime No.524 of 2014 u/s.174 Cr.P.C. was registered on 31.07.2014 at 9.00 hours and the printed First Information Report was marked as Ex.P40.

3.8. Since Regina did not return home from work, Mani [PW-1], Selvi [PW-2] and other relatives started searching for her and ultimately, Mani [PW-1] gave a written complaint [Ex.P45] on 31.07.2014, based on which, Angappan [PW-35], Sub-Inspector of Police, registered a case in Veeranam P.S.Crime No.251/2014 for 'woman missing' at 23.00 hours and prepared the printed First Information Report [Ex.P46].

3.9. Since the identity of the body was unknown, the railway police passed on the information to the local police stations and the photograph of Regina was also given publicity. On seeing that, Selvi [PW-2], sister-in-law of Regina and sister of Ramesh [A1], along with other family members, approached the railway police on 03.08.2014 and with their help, she and other relatives identified the body of Regina at the mortuary.

3.10. Dr. Padmavathi [PW-25] conducted autopsy on the body of Regina and issued the post-morte

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        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

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
        whatsapp-icon Back to top