SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 55724

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, R.POORNIMA, JJ
John Joseph – Appellant
Versus
The Inspector of Police, V.K.Puram Police Station – Respondent
Crl.A(MD)No.123 of 2022



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.V.Kathirevelu, Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Prabhu
For the Respondents: Mr.A.Nambiselvan Additional Public Prosecutor

The court highlighted that an accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt when faced with inconsistent evidence and the possibility of false implication, especially given prior enmity.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 374(2) - Indian Penal Code - Sections 120B, 302, 324 - Conviction and sentence - Appeal against conviction in homicide case - Acquittal on ground of insufficient evidence, inconsistencies in witness statements, and possibility of false implication due to prior enmity - The prosecution failed to prove the case against the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt - The suppression of the earliest complaint led to grave doubts regarding the prosecution's version - Conviction and sentence set aside, appellant acquitted. (Paras 30-35)

(B) Evidence - Standard of proof - Burden lies on the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt - In case of contradictory evidence and lack of corroboration, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt. (Paras 31-34)

Table of Content
1. prosecution details the incident and background. (Para 3 , 4)
2. trial court proceedings and charges against accused. (Para 6)
3. appellant's counsel argues material contradictions in evidence. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. issues to determine regarding the prosecution's evidence. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. analysis reveals inconsistencies and potential false implication. (Para 29 , 30 , 31)
6. supreme court principle on enmity and false implication. (Para 33)
7. prosecution failed to prove charges against appellant. (Para 34)
8. appeal allowed, conviction and sentence set aside. (Para 35)

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, in S.C.No.639 of 2015, dated 04.02.2022. 2. By judgment dated 04.02.2022 the trial Court had convicted the accused and sentenced him, as detailed below:

Penal ProvisionsSentence of ImprisonmentFine Amount
324 of IPCOne year rigorous imprisonmentRs.1000/- i/d to under go one month rigorous imprisonment
302 of IPCLife ImprisonmentRs.1000/- i/d to under go one month rigorous imprisonment
The sentences shall run concurrently

3.The case of the prosecution in brief:-

On 30.03.2015, when P.W.17 was working as a Head constable in V.K. Puram police station, he received an information from Ambasamudram Government Hospital that Murugan son of Maninaicker and his wife Savithiri were assaulted by some body and injured. When he had gone there they were shifted to Tirunelvei Medical College Hospital (TVMCH) for better treatment and he visited them on 31.03.2015 at TVMCH 14.30 hrs and obtained a statement/Ex.P.1 from P.W.1/Murugan and he had come back to the police station and he registered a F.I.R (Ex.P.14) in Crime No.56 of 2015 against A1/John Joseph and five other named persons under Section 147 ,148,323, 324,506(2) of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act. As per the statement, P.W.1 was engaged in rearing cows and was living with his wife Savithiri/the deceased and daughter Jothi/P.W.2 and grandsons Balavignesh/P.W.3 and Muthu venkatesh/P.W8 as a joint family. In the month of January during pongal time a cow belonging to him had trespassed and grazed into neighboring land owned by the A1/John Joseph due to which there was a quarrel between his grandson and the staff of John Joseph/A1 and that they have assaulted him and later they have damaged the house of P.W.1 and set fire to the household articles and in respect of which two cases have been registered against them in V.K.Puram Police Station. Following that enmity on 30.03.2015 at 11.00pm when he along with his wife, daughter and grand sons were sleeping in his house said A1/ John Joseph along with his four named staff and his uncle Alphonse had come to his house and asked for water. During that time, the light of his house in the front side was switched off. All of a sudden the said persons have indiscriminately assaulted and inflicted injuries on him and his wife with aruval and wooden logs due to which he and his wife sustained injuries and fracture and on seeing that his daughter ran away out of fear and her two sons had hidden inside the house. Immediately after the occurrence, his daughter Jothi had called the Inspector of Police, V.K. Puram Police Station/ P.W.21 and he had come there and arranged for an ambulance and sent them to Ambasamudram Government Hospital where first aid was given and later they were referred to TVMCH for further treatment and that on 31.03.2015 the statement was obtained from P.W.1 when he and wife were under treatment. Based on the statement a case in crime No. 56 0f 2015 /Ex.P.14 was registered for offences under , 148, 323, 324, 506(ii) and Sec.4 of T.N.P.H.W. Act . P.W 17 had forwarded copy of the statement and FIR to the Court and forwarded the copies to the higher officials and placed the same before P.W.20 for investigation. Based on the same P.W.17 proceeded to the place of occurrence and at 18.00 hrs examined P.W.11 and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top