BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G. JAYACHANDRAN, R. POORNIMA, JJ.
Chozhan - Appellant
Versus
State, Represented by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Jeeyapuram Sub Division, Jeeyapuram Police Station, Trichy District. (Crime No.389/2017) – Respondent
Crl.A(MD)No.520 of 2021
Decided On : 29-04-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Conviction for murder - Appellant convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for killing his wife - Confession made to Village Administrative Officer and corroborated by evidence - Prosecution established case beyond reasonable doubt - No merit in appeal against conviction. (Paras 1, 6, 26, 28)
(B) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 106 - Burden of proof on accused regarding facts within his knowledge - Failure to provide explanation for wife's death led to conviction. (Paras 21, 26)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for murdering his wife, who was found dead with head injuries. The appellant confessed to the crime, and evidence corroborated the prosecution's case.
Findings of Court:
The trial court found sufficient evidence to convict the appellant under Section 302 IPC, confirming the conviction on appeal.
Issues: The main issues included the validity of the confession, the presence of witnesses, and the motive for the crime.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the confession was credible and corroborated by other evidence, establishing the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Result: Criminal Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
(R. POORNIMA, J.)
This Criminal Appeal is filed against the conviction and sentence passed against the appellant/sole accused in the judgment dated 29.10.2019 passed by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Thiruchirapalli in S.C.No.11 of 2019 by convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- in default, to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:
(a) The complainant Mrs.Kalaivani, (P.W.1) is the Village Administrative Officer of the Kulumani Village. On 17.12.2017 at about 06.00 a.m, found a person standing nervously outside her office. Upon enquiry, he confessed to having committed a crime at about 2.30 a.m. His confession statement was recorded between 6.00 and 6.45 a.m.
(b) Thereafter, she along with the Village Assistant Jegadeesan had gone to the house of the accused and found his wife lying in a pool of blood with head injury. A grinding stone was found near the dead body.
(c) She took the accused to the Jeeyapuram Police Station and handed over the accused to the Inspector of Police with written complaint (Ex.P1) along with the statement of the accused (Ex.P2).
(d) The Inspector of Police (P.W.19), Jeeyapuram Police Station received the complaint (Ex.P1) and registered FIR (Ex.P.11) in Crime No.389 of 2017 for the offence under section 302 of IPC.
(e) Since the deceased died within two years from the date of marriage, P.W.19 sent an intimation to the Joint Commissioner of Police, Jeeyapuram and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam. He forwarded the FIR to the Judicial Magistrate and other officials through Mr.M.Karthikeyan (P.W.16), Police Constable 397. He assisted the investigation with the Deputy Superintendent of Police Assistant Mr.Srinivasan (P.W.20).
(f) After receipt of the copy of the FIR, the Deputy Superintendent of Police (P.W.20) went to the place of occurrence and advised the Head Constable Mr.Murgaiya (P.W.15) to take a photograph of the place of occurrence. He prepared observation mahazar (Ex.P3) and rough sketch (Ex.P12) in the presence of witnesses Mr.Bala Subramanian (P.W.9) and Mr.Venkatachalam. He recovered the blood- stained grinding stone (M.O.3) blood-stained mat (M.O.1) ordinary mat (M.O.2) and blood-stained bed sheet (M.O.4) under a recovery mahazar (Ex.P4).
(g) He recorded the confession statement of the accused in the presence of the Village Administrative Officer, Kalaivani (P.W.1) and Jegadeesan. He also examined other witnesses and recorded their statements.
(h) He went to the Government Hospital and examined the witnesses Madeswaran (P.W.5), Maheswari (P.W.6) and Manimegalai (P.W.7) and recorded their statements and then sent the material objects to the Court under Form-95.
(i) On 18.12.2017, he enquired Dr. Selvakumar (P.W.17) who had conducted postmortem on the dead body and obtained the postmortem certificate. The Doctor explained the injuries found in the dead body as follows:-
“Following antemortem injuries: -
1. Body deep lacerated wound on right side of the forehead of 2x1 cm with marginal reddish brown abrasion of 3.5 x 3 cm.
2. Bone deep lacerated wound behind the right ear of 1x1 cm with marginal reddish brown abrasion of 4x1 cm; on dissection, contusion underlying the lacerated wounds and on the left side of the head; skull: Linear fracture from right temporal to left temporal bone of 22cm; across the middle cranial fossa; separates the base of the skull as front and back; Membranes: Thin red colour subdural haemorrhage present; Brain: Intact, C/s.sticky.
3. Reddish brown abrasion present over the right lower jaw on the back side of 1x1 cm.
External genital organs: Intact, Heart: intact, C/s. All the chambers contain fluid blood; Lungs: Intact C/s.Patchy areas of blood present; On bloodless neck dissection: Larynx and trachea: fluid blood present; Hyoid bone and Thyroid cartilage:
The court upheld the conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, affirming that the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt through credible evidence and confession.
Circumstantial evidence must be conclusive and extra-judicial confessions require corroboration; failure to meet these standards results in acquittal.
Extrajudicial confessions require corroboration and cannot solely establish guilt without reliable evidence.
Extra judicial confessions can be a basis for conviction if corroborated by sufficient evidence. In sudden quarrel cases, conviction can be modified from murder to a lesser charge under Section 304 P....
In criminal cases relying on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove each circumstance beyond reasonable doubt, and the evidence must form a complete chain that excludes other hypotheses ....
The conviction must be based on a complete and reliable chain of circumstantial evidence, where extrajudicial confessions cannot solely establish guilt without corroboration.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.