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

2024 Supreme(Mad) 720

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G. JAYACHANDRAN, C. KUMARAPPAN, JJ.
Dharmaraj and Another – Appellants
Versus
State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Pasupathipalayam – Respondent
Crl. Appeal (MD) No. 151 of 2020
Decided On : 26-03-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : M. Ajmalkhan, R. Ganeshprabu.
For the Respondent: R. Meenakshi Sundaram.

IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment underscores the necessity of a complete and reliable chain of circumstances in circumstantial evidence cases to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

Criminal Appeal - Circumstantial Evidence - Cr.P.C. - 120-B, 302, 201 I.P.C.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were tried for offences under Sections 120-B, 302, and 201 r/w 302 I.P.C. for the murder of Karthi. The prosecution's case relied on circumstantial evidence, including witness testimonies and call details.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the origin and genesis of the prosecution case to be doubtful, with unreliable witness testimonies and incomplete chain of circumstances. The call details lacked proper certification and did not align with ocular evidence. The court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.

Issues: Reliability of witness testimonies, sufficiency of circumstantial evidence, and admissibility of call details under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for complete and reliable chain of circumstances in circumstantial evidence cases. It highlighted the importance of satisfying the conditions laid down by the Supreme Court for establishing guilt based on circumstantial evidence.

Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was allowed, the judgment of the trial Court was set aside, and the appellants were acquitted from all charges.

JUDGMENT :

Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C. to call for the records and set aside the judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Court (Fast Track Mahila Court), Karur, in S.C. No. 98 of 2018, dated 03.10.2018 and allow this appeal and acquit the appellants/A1 and A2.

1. Dharma Raj (A1), Ramaraj (A2) and Arunkumar (A3) were tried for offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 302, and 201 r/w 302 I.P.C. before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Karur.

2. The trial Court, vide judgment dated 03.10.2019 held them guilty of charges framed against them and convicted them to undergo the sentence as below:

A1 to A3

120-B I.P.C.

Life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

 

302 I.P.C.

Life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

 

201 I.P.C.

Three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

3. Being aggrieved, Dharmaraj (A1) and his brother Ramaraj (A2) had preferred Crl. Appeal (MD) No. 151 of 2020, whereas Arunkumar preferred Crl. Appeal (MD) No. 80 of 2020. Pending appeal, Arunkumar died, hence, his appeal was dismissed as abated.

4. The case of the prosecution as spoken through its witnesses:

(i) Dharmaraj and Karthi where pursuing degree course in the Government Arts College at Palani. They used to travel together to the College in the bus. In the same bus, another College student by name, Soundarya used to travel. With Soundarya both Dharmaraj and Karthi had a good friendship. In due course, when Soundarya stopped talking with Karthi, he suspected it was because of Dharmaraj. A week before the occurrence, Karthi picked quarrel with Dharmaraj and assaulted Dharmaraj.

(ii) Felt insulted, Dharmaraj declared that he will inform this to his brother and with his help, he will do away Karthi within a week. Then, he informed this matter to his brother Ramaraj and sought his help. Dharmaraj along with his brother Ramaraj and his friend Arunkumar conspired to kill Karthi. Pursuance to the conspiracy, they all met on 19.11.2017 at about 07.30 p.m. near the Allaligounder graveyard. Then, A3 called Karthi to that place to join with him for a drink. When Karthi came to the Allalligounder graveyard at about 08.15 p.m. in his bike bearing Registration No. TN-57-B-5278, the second accused Ramaraj questioned Karthi why he quarrelled with his brother Dharmaraj and hit him on the forehead with a beer bottle. The third accused Arunkumar hit Karthi with the beer bottle on the face and right chest. When Karthi tried to escape from that place, the second and third accused caught hold the hands of Karthi. The first accused Dharmaraj strangulated the neck of Karthi using a handkerchief, like a rope. Thereafter, to screen the body of the Karthi, they carried the body in their two wheeler to the near by private Railway track leading to Chettinad Cement Factory, Puliyur, near Ayyampalayam Road and laid the body across the Railway track.

(iii) On next day, at about 06.00 a.m., the train driver PW-2 informed the Village Administrative Officer (PW-1) about the dead body lying on the Railway track. The V.A.O. on receipt of the information, went to the spot and enquired with the local people about the identity of the body. Since they were not able to provide any clue to her, she reported to the Police about the unidentified dead body of 25 years old boy with injuries. Based on her complaint (Ex.P1), the Police registered the F.I.R. The Inspector of Police came to the spot and prepared the Observation Mahazar (Ex.P2). From the scene of occurrence, he collected soil stained with blood and without blood and stone gravel with blood and without blood. Mahazar for recovery of these material objects were p

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top