The central legal point established in the judgment is the absence of intention to cause death and the differentiation of charges based on the nature of the assaults and the absence of enmity with the victim.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: The Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C against the conviction and sentence imposed in S.C.No.210 of 2013 dated 21.11.2014 on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District.)

1. The accused in S.C.No.210 of 2013 on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Chidambaram are the appellants herein.

2. The Inspector of Police, Chidambaram Taluk Police Station, Cuddalore District, prosecuted the accused for having caused the death of Shanmugavel by murdering him an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and thereby, charged the first accused under Sections 294(b), 302 IPC and the second accused under Sections 323 and 302 r/w 34 IPC.

3. In the trial Court, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses PW1 to PW14 and marked 15 documents Ex.P1 to P15 and also filed 3 material objects MOs1 to 3. On the side of the accused, the accused examined two witnesses, DW1 & DW2 and also marked Ex.D1.

4. The trial Court, on considering the oral and documentary evidence, acquitted the First accused for an offence punishable under Sections 294(b) IPC and found guilty of the accused under Sections 304(ii) IPC and found the second accused guilty under 304(ii) r/w.34 IPC and sentenced the first accused to undergo 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment for offence under Section 304(ii) IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment and sentenced the second accused to undergo 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment for offence under Section 304(ii) r/w 34 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment and the aforesaid sentences were ordered to run concurrently and the period of sentence already undergone was directed to be set off. Aggrieved by this conviction and sentence, the accused filed this appeal.

5. The prosecution case is that the accused/appellants are husband and wife. PW1 Vasanthi is the wife of the deceased Shanmugavel. The accused and PW1 Vasanthi, deceased Shanmugavel are residing at N.Poolamedu Big Street, Chidambaram Taluk and the accused are residing behind PW1 Vasanthi and the deceased Shanmugavel’s garden. They are having a garden with fruit bearing trees. On 11.06.2013 at 7.00 a.m. the accused's goat went into the garden of PW1 and damaged the crops. PW1 drove away the goat and sent it out of the garden. On seeing that, the second accused Jayakodi quarreled with PW1 Vasanthi. On the same day evening, PW1 Vasanthi informed the matter to her husband deceased Shanmugavel. He went to the house of the accused and enquired about the quarrel and he quarreled with the accused. PW2 Kalaivanan, PW3 Ravichandran and one Beema Rao pacified the quarrel. Thereafter, the deceased Shanmugavel returned to his house. On the way of his house, near his cow shed at about 7.30.p.m. the first accused Kumar @ Sasikumar came behind the deceased and assaulted on his head with a wooden stick (MO1). On sustaining injury, the deceased Shanmugavel fell down. The second accused Jayakodi also came along with her husband/first accused and assaulted the deceased Shanmugavel with her hands on his face. The deceased Shanmugavel fainted and fell down. Immediately, PW2 Kalaivanan, PW3 Ravichandran and Beema Rao informed an Ambulnace and took him to the hospital and the Nurse, who is in the ambulance, tested Shanmugavel and declared he died. Thereafter, he was taken into the Government Hospital. The incident was witnessed by PW4 Dhayanithi, PW5 Sathish and PW6 Sanjai Gandhi and they also came to the place of occurrence and saw the incident. After Shanmugavel was declared as dead, PW1 Vasanthi went to Chidambaram Taluk Police Station at about 23.30 hours and on the same day i.e. on 11.06.2013 at about 23.30 hours, she gave the complaint Ex.P1 to the Sub-Inspector of Police PW12 Selvam.

6. PW12 Selvam Sub-Inspector of Police, received the complaint and registered a case in crime No.191 of 2013 under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, and 302 IPC and the pri