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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 1220

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
R. SUBRAMANIAN, N. SATHISH KUMAR, JJ.
Murugan & Others - Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Inspector of Police, Dindigul - Respondent
CRL.A.(MD) No. 163 of 2019
Decided On : 16-03-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants:K. Sundaravel, Advocate. For the Respondent: A. Thiruvadi Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of reliable and convincing evidence in proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

False Implication - Criminal Appeal - Sections 147, 148, 120(b), 302 of IPC - The court analyzed the evidence and found the prosecution's case doubtful, highlighting the unreliable and unnatural conduct of the witnesses and the delay in lodging the complaint. The judgment set aside the conviction and acquitted the accused.

Fact of the Case:

The deceased, husband of P.W.1, was allegedly killed by the accused due to a dispute over immovable properties. The prosecution's case relied on witness testimonies and evidence collected at the place of occurrence.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the evidence of the prosecution witnesses to be unreliable and unnatural, highlighting the delay in lodging the complaint and the conduct of the witnesses. It concluded that the entire prosecution case was doubtful.

Issues: The issues revolved around the reliability of witness testimonies, the delay in lodging the complaint, and the prosecution's failure to provide convincing evidence to prove the guilt of the accused.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the unreliable and unnatural conduct of the witnesses, the delay in lodging the complaint, and the lack of convincing evidence to support the prosecution's case.

Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellants were set aside, and the appellants were acquitted from the charges. Any fine amount paid was to be refunded, and bail bonds were terminated.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the judgment of conviction dated 28.03.2019 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dindigul in Sessions Case No.158 of 2017 and acquit the appellants.)

R. Subramanian, J. & N. Sathish Kumar, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellants / accused Nos.1 to 5, aggrieved over the conviction and sentence, dated 28.03.2019, made in S.C.No.158 of 2017, by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dindigul.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as follows:

(i) The deceased is the husband of P.W.1. There was a dispute over the immovable properties between the accused and the deceased, in respect of which, a complaint was also lodged by the deceased against the accused on 28.07.2013. However, the police has advised both the parties to resolve the issue before the Civil Court. From that onwards, the accused had decided to kill the deceased.

(ii) When the matter stood thus, on 08.11.2013, when the deceased was returning in his two wheeler M.O.10 to his village, the accused travelled in a Van M.O.6 and hit against the deceased's vehicle. P.W.2 and P.W.3 were proceeding at the relevant point of time to their village. The accused after hitting the deceased with their vehicle got down from the vehicle. The 2nd accused attacked the deceased with iron rod and the 5th accused hit the deceased with the jockey and threw the body of the deceased in the nearby bushes. P.W.2 and P.W.3 have informed the same to P.W.1 and others in the village. Immediately, P.W.1 along with her children and other villagers rushed to the place of occurrence and found the dead body of her husband. Thereafter, on the next day morning ie., 09.11.2013 at about 08.00 a.m., she lodged a complaint under Ex.P.1 to P.W.13.

(iii) P.W.13 Special Sub Inspector of Police received the complaint at 8.00 a.m., on 09.11.2013 and registered the case in Crime No.209 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 120(b) and 302 of IPC under Ex.P.15.

(iv) P.W.14 Investigation Officer took up the case for investigation and visited the place of occurrence and prepared the observation mahazar under Ex.P.3 and rough sketch under Ex.P.17 in the presence of P.W.8 and other witnesses. He also seized M.O.6 and collected blood stained soil under M.O.7 and ordinary soil under M.O.8 and collected one Vodafone cellphone found in the place of occurrence under Ex.P.4 mahazar. He also examined the witnesses and recorded their statement, thereafter, conducted inquest over the dead body and prepared inquest report Ex.P.19 and sent the dead body for autopsy.

(v) P.W.12 Medical Officer attached to the Government Hospital conducted autopsy over the dead body and found the following injuries:-

“External Injuries: A deep cut injury on left forehead about 10x1x3 cm extending intracranially involving the brain. Left eye laceration left zygomatic bone left frontal bone leftt mandible, left facial bone, right ear partial avulsion. Right shoulder joint contusion right clavicle 1-3 rd rib, right little finger partially cut, right forearm & arm abrasion, Bleeding both nostrils open, right tibia & fibule at the junction of middle & lower 1/3. Internal examination skull bone intact, left facial extends intracranially lungs (N), hyoid-Intact, Liuee-laceration Bladder-pale is empty. Stomach filled with partially digested food materials. Heart (N) spleen, kidney appears normal intestines-pale appears normal.”

and issued Ex.P.14 and opined that the deceased died due to injuries.

(vi) P.W.14 in continuation of his investigation, arrested the accused 1 to 3 on 09.11.2013 in the presence of P.W.9 Village Administrative Officer and recorded the confession of the third accused. Admissible portion of the confession is marked as Ex.P.5. In pursuance of the same, he seized iron rod M.O.1 and two wheeler M.O.9 and cellphone M.O.2 series. Thereafter, on 18.11.2

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 Back to top