BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, R. POORNIMA, JJ.
Nagarajan – Appellant
Versus
The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli Police Station – Respondent
Crl. Appeal (MD) No. 625 of 2022
Decided On : 19-02-2026
JUDGMENT :
R. POORNIMA, J.
1. This Criminal Appeal is filed against the conviction and sentence passed against the appellants/accused 1 & 2 in the judgment dated 06.09.2022 made in S.C.No.77 of 2019 by the Additional District and Sessions Court, Virudhunagar, in which judgment, Accused 1 & 2 had been convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each in default to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:
(a) The accused A1 and A2, along with the juvenile accused Udhayakumar, had previous enmity with the deceased regarding the illegal consumption of water, which had been objected to by the deceased. On 27.09.2018, at about 7.20 p.m., the complainant was informed that A1 and A2, along with the juvenile accused, had quarrelled with his brother in connection with the administration of the village and requested him to immediately come to Udayanendal Bus Stand.
(b) Immediately, at about 7.45 p.m., the complainant and others went to the place of occurrence with a torch light and witnessed the accused quarrelling with his brother Pasupathi, and restraining him from proceeding further. When his brother attempted to proceed, A1 abused him in filthy language and attacked him with a wooden log on his right cheek, mid-scalp, and right side of the neck indiscriminately. A2 also attacked the deceased on his forehead and on the right and back side of his head. Due to the said attack, the deceased fell down.
(c) P.W.1 and other witnesses raised hue and cry and requested the accused not to attack him. On seeing the witnesses, the accused fled away from the place of occurrence. Thereafter, the complainant and others rushed to the spot and saw his brother lying with severe head injuries. When they attempted to take him to the hospital, they found that he was already dead. Immediately thereafter, the complainant informed their relatives about the death of his brother and subsequently lodged the complaint (Ex.P1).
(d) P.W.20 Thiru.Ashok, Sub Inspector of Police, Trichy Police Station received the complaint (Ex.P1) on 28.09.2018 at about 2.00 a.m., and registered FIR (Ex.P14) in Crime No.196 of 2018 for the offence under Sections 341, 294(b) and 302 IPC.
(e) P.W.21 Thiru.Deiveegapandian, Inspector of Police took up the case for investigation and went to the pace of occurrence and prepared observation mahazar (Ex.P4), rough sketch (Ex.P15) and also recovered blood stained soil and ordinary soil and two broken pieces of wood log (M.O.4) under a recovery mahazar (Ex.P16) in the presence of witnesses Velmurugan (P.W.12), Vilraman (P.W.13). Thereafter, On 28.09.2018 at about 13.00 hours, he arrested the accused 1 and 2 and recorded their confession statement and recovered Hero Honda Motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN 58 T 2791 (M.O.8) under recovery mahazar (Ex.P10) and also recovered two wooden logs and Motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN 67 AD 6541 (M.O.9) under recovery mahazar (Ex.P12). He conducted inquest on the dead body in the presence of panchayadhars and witness and prepared inquest report (Ex.P17). He examined the witnesses and recorded their statements.
Medical evidence
(f) P.W.17 Dr.Jeyanthi, who conducted postmortem on the dead body and found the following injuries :
External Injuries:
(1) 5 cm x2.5 cm lacerated wound on the forehead extending from the right eyebrow to the middle of forehead.
(2) 1 cm x 0.5 cm lacerated injury behind the right ear.
(3) 1 cm x 0.5 cm (depth) lacerated injury in the neck just below the right angle of mandible.
(4) Swelling of 10 x 10 cm (contusion) size seen on the right cheek.
She issued postmortem report and final opinion (Ex.P.13). She opined that the deceased would have died due to massive blood loss due to injury in the blood vessel in the neck. Biology report (Ex.P.18), Serology report (Ex.P.19), Toxicology report (Ex.P.20) were received .
(g) P.W.21 examined all the witn
Eyewitness testimony, particularly from injured witnesses, is crucial in establishing guilt, even with minor inconsistencies in their accounts.
A conviction cannot stand when there are significant contradictions between ocular and medical evidence, raising doubts about the prosecution's case.
The prosecution failed to establish a reliable case due to contradictions in witness testimonies and unexplained delays in lodging the FIR, leading to acquittal.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. If there is any doubt as to the guilt of the accused, the accused must be acquitted.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and significant procedural irregularities or unreliable witness testimony can lead to an acquittal.
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.
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.