Minor inconsistencies in witness testimonies do not invalidate reliable evidence in murder cases.

JUDGMENT

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

AND N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellant / accused, aggrieved over the conviction and sentence, dated 12.09.2000, made in S.C.No.58 of 1995, by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Cum Additional District Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi.

2.The brief facts of the prosecution case is as follows:-

(i)The deceased was running a tea stall, wherein P.W.1, who is the son of the deceased's elder brother, was working. P.W.2 is the younger brother of the deceased. He was also working in the same shop run by the deceased. On 09.01.1993 at about 09.00 p.m., the accused along with others came to the shop of the deceased and after taking food, they did not pay for it. This was objected by the deceased. Thereafter, on the same date at about 12.30 p.m., the accused and others caused damage to the shop owned by P.W.4. On 10.11.1993, the accused came to the shop of the deceased and took the deceased out side of the shop under the pretext of meeting with some political persons. P.W.1 and P.W.2 had followed the deceased and the accused from the distance of 50 ft. from the shop. Suddenly, the deceased had removed billhook M.O.1, which was concealed in the body and cut the deceased repeatedly on the left side of the neck. P.W.1 and P.W.2 also witnessed the occurrence and immediately, P.W.1 went to the police station and gave a statement, which was marked as Ex.P.1.

(ii)P.W.3 was also working under the deceased shop at the relevant point of time. According to him, P.W.1 and P.W.2 followed the deceased and the accused. After sometime, they rushed to the shop and informed about the death of the deceased. P.W.4 has stated that on one occasion the accused destroyed his shop.

(iii)P.W.11 Head Constable at the relevant point of time, has recorded the statement of P.W.1 and registered the case in Crime No.879 of 1993 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC under Ex.P.13 First Information Report and the same has been sent to the Court and copy also sent to the Investigation Officer.

(iv)P.W.12 Investigation Officer took up the case for investigation, went to the place of occurrence and prepared observation mahazar Ex.P.2 and also drew rough sketch Ex.P.14. He conducted inquest over the dead body on the next day morning, prepared inquest report Ex.P.15 and sent the body to autopsy with requisition.

(v)P.W.7 Medical Officer conducted autopsy over the dead body and found the following injuries:-

“1.10x1x4 cut injuries on the left neck. 2.10x2x5 inch cut injury on the centre of left neck.

3.3x1.1/2*2 inch cut injury on the neck severing food pipe.

4.10x4x1 cut injury on the left jaw.

5.1x1 inch cut injury on the left shoulder.”

and issued Postmortem Certificate Ex.P.7 and also opined that the deceased died due to the injuries Nos.1 to 4 and hemorrhage.

(vi)P.W.12 in continuation of the investigation, on 19.11.1993 remanded the accused, who surrendered before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankovil, and at about 2.30 p.m., recorded the confession of the accused in the presence of witnesses. In pursuance of the same, he seized material objects and finally laid final report against the accused.

3.Before the trial Court, on the side of the prosecution, P.W.1 to P.W.12 were examined, Exs.P1 to 15 and M.O.1 to M.O.7 were marked. On the side of the appellant, none was examined, however, one document was marked. On questioning under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., the accused denied charges.

4.Based on the evidences and materials, the trial Court had found the accused guilty, convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 3