Back
2025 Supreme(Mad) 2218
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.JAYACHANDRAN, R.POORNIMA, JJ.
Muthulakshmi - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Crl.A(MD)Nos.497 and 453 of 2021
Decided on : 30-04-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.P.T.Ramesh Raja, for Mr.Pon Karthikeyan
For the Respondent: Mr.S.Ravi, Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.T.J.Ebenezer Charles
The court established that insufficient evidence of common intention among the accused led to the conviction of only one for culpable homicide, while others were acquitted.
Headnote:
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 302, and 304(ii) - Assault leading to death - Conviction of one accused under Section 304(ii) IPC for causing death of Parameswaran, while others acquitted due to insufficient evidence - Delay in FIR registration raised doubts on prosecution's case - Trial Court found evidence only against one accused for fatal injury. (Paras 6, 30)
(B) Evidence - Standard of proof - The trial Court held that the prosecution failed to establish a common intention among the accused to cause death, leading to acquittal of three accused. (Paras 28, 30)
Facts of the case:
The incident occurred during a temple festival where Parameswaran was attacked by five individuals after a quarrel. He succumbed to his injuries two days later. The FIR was registered after a significant delay, raising questions about its credibility. (Paras 1-3)
Findings of Court:
The trial Court convicted one accused for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, citing lack of evidence against the others. (Paras 30)
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of witness testimonies, the delay in FIR registration, and the determination of common intention among the accused. (Paras 26, 30)
Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the evidence did not sufficiently establish a shared intent to kill among the accused, leading to the conviction of only one accused under Section 304(ii) IPC. (Paras 28, 30)
Result: Appeals dismissed.
History of the case:
On 12.07.2019, at about 8.00 hours Keeranur Police at Pudukottai District received intimation from the Trichy Government Hospital that a person by name Parameswaran aged about 26 years, son of Ganesan, brought to the hospital with injuries by his sister Muthulakshmi. On receipt of the initimation, the Sub- Inspector of Police Mr.Jeyakumar went to the hospital and recorded the statement of Muthulakshmi which disclosed that there was previous enmity between her family and the family members of Palsamy residing in the same street. Whileso, on 11.07.2019 at about 05.00 p.m., in the Puliyur Chellayee Amman Temple Festival, while the procession of the deity was going on, her brother Parameswaran along with others was dancing. At that time, offering plate held by one Sudhakar, S/o.Palsamy accidently, hit and thrown by her brother Parameswaran. The coconut in the offering plate fell down. Infuriated by that, Sudhakar fought with Parameswaran. She and others intervened and prevented further escalation of the fight. After offering prayer at Sangili Karuppar Temple, at about 05.30 p.m., She, her brother and her husband Murugesan were standing outside the temple. Sudhakar, S/o.Palsamy, Karthi, S/o.Settu, Karthick, S/o. Kumar, Suresh, S/o.Jeyasankar, Dinesh S/o.Karuppiah, came with wooden logs and attacked Parameswaran, They abusing him with filthy language for hiting the offering plate held by Sudhakar. They also uttered that only on murdering him their anger will subside. Attributing all the five accused assaulted Parameswaran with wooden log over the head and body complaint came to be registered at about 10.00 p.m.
2. FIR alleging Parameswaran was attacked by 5 persons with wooden logs with an intention to cause his death was registered in Keeranur Police Station in Crime No.175 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 294(b) and 307 IPC at about 10.00 hours on 12.07.2019. At the time of complaint, the injured was unconcious and taking treatment in the Government Hospital, Trichy as inpatient. In the complainant, Muthulakshmi has stated that she along with her relative Sathishkumar and Vignesh took the injured to the hospital in a passing vehicle.
3. During the course of investigation, the accused persons were arrested. One of the named accused Karthick, S/o.Kumar, found to be a juvenile and therefore, final report was filed as against Sudhakar(A1), Karthick S/o.Settu(A2) Suresh s/o.Jeyasankar(A3) and Dineshkumar, s/o.Karupaiha. The injured Parameswaran died on 14.07.2019 at about 6.00 p.m. After altering the charges from 307 IPC to 302 IPC, investigation got completed and final report filed against 4 accused and the case against one of the accused by Karthick S/o.Kumar, was split up.
4. On committal to the Court of Sessions in S.C.No.1 of 2022, the Special Court for Essential Commodity Act and Additional Sessions, Pudukkottai, framed the charges under Sections 147, 148, 294(b) and 302 IPC against all the four accused.
5. To prove the prosecution case, 11 witnesses were examined, 15 documents marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.15. Four R.S.Pathi Wooden Logs were marked as M.O.1 series.
6. The trial Court, on appreciation of the evidence, held that the prosecution established the guilt of A1 for offence under Section 304(ii) IPC. In respect of other accused, the evidence is insufficient, therefore, A2 to A4 were acquitted from all the charges.
7. In the above said background, Crl.A(MD)No.453 of 2021 is preferred by Sudhakar(A1), who suffers conviction and sentence of 4 years rigorous imprisonment for offence of under Section 304(ii)IPC and fine of Rs.10,000/-in default to undergo three months Simple imprisonment. Crl.A(MD)No.497 of 2021 preferred against the acquittal of all the accused persons by the defacto complainant Muthulakshmi.
8. Gist of the prosecution case as per evidence:-
P.W.1-Muthulakshmi, is the de-facto complainant. The deceased Parameswaran is her brother. Since they all belong to same village, all the four accused in this cas
