BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
N. ANAND VENKATESH , P. DHANABAL, JJ.
Ponnusamy - Appellant
Versus
The Inspector of Police - Respondent
Crl.A.(MD) No.344 of 2023
Decided On : 03-03-2026
JUDGMENT :
P.DHANABAL, J.
Challenging the conviction and sentence rendered by the learned V Additional Sessions Judge, Madurai in S.C.No.339 of 2016 dated 21.02.2023, the present criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant.
2. The trial Court has convicted the appellant as follows:


3.2. The Sub Inspector of Police/P.W.13 registered First Information Report /Ex.P13 in Crime No.306 of 2014 for the offences under Sections 452, 324,307 and 302 of IPC. Thereafter the Investigation Officer went to the place of occurrence on the day at about 6.00 am., and prepared observation mahazhar/Ex.P.3 and rough sketch/Ex.P.14 in the presence of P.W.5/Gurusamy and one Alagarsamy. He also seized blood stained soil and ordinary soil and examined the injured witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2. Thereafter the Investigation Officer conducted inquest of the body of the deceased and prepared inquest report/Ex.P.15. On 04.07.2014 the appellant surrendered before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Melur and he was taken police custody as per the order of the Court and the appellant gave confession statement on 05.07.2014. As per the disclosure statement of the appellant the Investigation Officer seized M.O. 1/billhook through seizure mahazhar /Ex.P.10 and thereafter he also seized the two wheeler bearing Reg.No. TN 59 AV 7947 Hero Honda through Ex.P.11/mahazhar. Thereafter the appellant was remanded to judicial custody along with the material objects. The Investigation Officer obtained post mortem certificate and examined the doctor /P.W.10 who conducted post mortem and obtained certificate /Ex.P.21, thereafter due to transfer he handed over the investigation to P.W.15 and the said P.W.15 also examined the witnesses and sent the seized materials for chemical analysis and after obtaining report from the forensic lab he filed final report as against the appellant for the offences under Sections 449, 326, 307 and 302 of IPC. Thereafter the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.
4. After filing of final report, the trial Court has framed charges for the offences under Sections 450, 294(b),302,307 and 326 of IPC. The above charges were read over and explained to the appellant The appellant denied the charges and claimed to be tried.
5. The prosecution examined P.W. 1 to P.W.15 and marked exhibits Ex.P.1 to P.23 and material objects M.O.1 to M.O.6 were produced. After completion of prosecution witnesses the appellant was questioned under Section 313 (1)(b) of Cr.P.C., with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing against him, he denied the same as false. On the side of the appellant one witness was examined.
6. After analyzing the evidence and upon hearing both sides, the trial Court has convicted the appellant for the offences as stated supra. Aggrieved by the said judgment and convictio
![]()
![]()
The court reaffirmed the credibility of eyewitness accounts in criminal proceedings, emphasizing their significance even amid investigative lapses.
The court upheld the conviction for murder, emphasizing the reliance on credible eyewitness testimony to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Assault with stick in sudden quarrel without premeditation falls under Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC, reducing Section 302 to 304 Part I conviction.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on credible eyewitness and medical evidence, establishing clear intent under Section 302 IPC.
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.
Evidence of domestic violence, when corroborated by witness testimonies and medical examinations, can establish guilt in murder cases under IPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on clear and cogent witness testimony, the role of witnesses in delivering justice, and the distinction between related and interested....
For convictions under SC/ST Act, incidents must occur in public view; however, discrepancies in witness accounts do not negate credible evidence of assault leading to murder.
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.