Back
2022 Supreme(Mad) 713
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. Jayachandran, J.
Allapitchai @ Jakir Hussain & Another – Appellants
Versus
State Rep.by Inspector of Police, Thiruvallur – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 735 of 2012
Decided On : 14-07-2022
For the Appellants:R. Rajan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:S. Udayakumar, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side).
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of IPC Section 304(ii) in the context of circumstantial evidence and confession statements to determine the nature of the murder and modify the sentence.
Headnote:
Criminal Appeal - Homicide - IPC Section 304(ii) - Summary of Acts and Sections: IPC Section 304(ii) - The court discussed the evidence presented by the prosecution witnesses, the recovery of material objects, and the post mortem report. The court analyzed the circumstantial evidence and the confession statements of the accused. The key legal provisions of IPC Section 304(ii) were interpreted in the context of the evidence and influenced the court's decision to modify the sentence imposed on the appellants.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted under IPC Section 304(ii) for the homicide death of Pachimuthu. The prosecution presented evidence from witnesses, material objects recovery, and post mortem report. The appellants appealed the conviction and sentence, challenging the reliability of witnesses and the recovery of the weapon.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the witnesses' testimony reliable and the recovery of material objects supported the prosecution's case. The court analyzed the circumstantial evidence and the confession statements of the accused, concluding that the appellants were involved in the gruesome murder of Pachimuthu. The court modified the sentence imposed on the appellants based on the nature of the murder.
Issues: Reliability of witnesses, recovery of material objects, and the nature of the murder were the key issues in the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the circumstantial evidence, confession statements, and post mortem report to establish the appellants' involvement in the murder. The court also considered the nature of the murder in modifying the sentence.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was partly allowed, and the sentence of 5 years Rigorous Imprisonment was modified to 3 years Rigorous Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, 6 months of R.I. The trial Court was directed to secure the accused to undergo the remaining period of the sentence imposed on them.
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374 (ii) of Cr.P.C., against the judgment of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, at Ponneri, Thiruvallur District in S.C.No.156 of 2011 by judgment dated 25.09.2012 convicting them under Section 304 (ii) of IPC and sentencing them to undergo five years RI and fine amount Rs.2,000/- default six months RI.)
1. The appellants herein Allapitchai (A1) and Sekar (A2) faced trial for charge under Section 302 of IPC in connection with the homicide death of Pachimuthu on 21.07.2009 at about 21.00 hours.
2. The prosecution to prove the charges marshalled 16 witnesses, marked 12 documents and 5 material objects.
3. On appreciation of evidence, the trial Court held both the accused 1 and 2 are guilty of offence punishable under Section 304 (ii) IPC and sentenced them to undergo five years RI and pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each, in default 6 months RI.
4. The conviction and sentence is the subject matter of this appeal.
5. The brief facts of the case as spoken by the prosecution witnesses:- PW-1(Mr. Rajendran) is the brother of the deceased Pachimuthu. He knows the accused persons. On 21.07.2009, at about 6.30 p.m., he saw his brother sitting in between Allapichai and Sekar going in the two wheeler driven by Allapitchai. That night, his brother did not return to home. On the next day, he heard his brother body lying in the Ponneri River. He went there and saw his brother dead with injuries on head and stab injuries in his private part. He then went to the police station and gave complaint marked as Ex.P1.
6. PW-2(Mr. Nagalingam) has deposed that on that day at about 08.30 p.m., while he was going to the Bazaar to have tea, near the river bed, he was attending his nature's call. At that time, he saw the accused and the deceased together going towards the river. After some time, he heard scream. Next day, there was a crowd in the river. He saw Pachimuthu lying dead.
7. PW-3(Mr.Thoppai @ Tamilarasu) and PW-4(Mr.Baggiya @ Baggiyaraj @ Prakash) are witnesses known to the accused as well as the deceased. PW-3 had deposed that on that, he saw A1 and A2 were standing with a bike on the road proceeding towards NGO Nagar. A1 stopped him and told that he had murdered Pachimuthu
“OTHER LANGUAGE”
and took away Rs.500/- from his pocket. Similarly, PW-4 had deposed that while he was returning home after his work, he saw the accused persons at 09.00 p.m., standing with a bike on the road proceeding towards NGO Nagar. A1 told him that they had murdered Pachimuthu and asked money and took Rs.150 from him. PW-5 (Mr. Murali) is the witness to the mahazar (Ex.P2) for the recovery of material objects at Ponneri River on 22.07.2009 between 11.15 a.m and 11.30 a.m.
8. P.W-6(Mr. Marimuthu), the Village Administrative Officer of Ponneri Village and PW-10(Ms. Lakshmi) the Ponneri Revenue Divisional Inspector had witnessed the recording of the confession given by the accused narrating the reason for murdering Pachimuthu and the manner in which they committed the murder. Based on their confession statements, the blood strained knife, reaper wood were recovered in the presence of the witness examined as PW-7 and PW-11. The prosecution examined PW-9 as the witness to the observation mahazar. PW-8 and PW-12 treated as hostile witnesses.
9. PW-13 is the Doctor, who conducted the autopsy and given the post mortem certificate (Ex.P7) along with her opinion for the cause of death. PW-14(Tmt.Vijaya) is the Assistant Director of Forensic Science Laboratory, who conducted the serology test on the following items and given report that except item No.4, in all other items 1 to 3 and 5 to 8, blood detected.
“Item 1: A30 x 5 x 2 cm broken wooden reaper on which were dark brown stains.
Item 2: Two small broken wooden pieces, on which were dark brown stains.
Item 3: Moist earth mixed with vegetative matter on which were dark brown stains.
Item 4: Earth mixed with vegetative matter.
Item 5: A ragged red silken shirt wi
