The Court affirmed that the testimony of an injured eyewitness possesses significant evidentiary weight, and the premeditated nature of the attack ruled out claims of sudden provocation, justifying the conviction under murder charges.

JUDGMENT :

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

The appellant/Accused No.1 in S.C.No.67 of 2018 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Court, Virudhunagar has filed this appeal challenging the following conviction and sentence imposed against him in the impugned judgment dated 17.02.2023.

2.Brief facts of the prosecution case:

According to the prosecution, the deceased, Senthil Kumar, and the first accused (appellant) were working as building contractors. Prosecution Witnesses (PW) 1, 2 (Velmurugan – second accused), and PW6 were masons working under them. These workers were engaged by the first accused for construction work at Mudukulathur, where they had been working for about six days prior to the occurrence. During this period, the deceased approached the first accused and expressed his difficulty in completing certain construction work at Kadaladi. At his request, the first accused permitted PW1, PW2, and PW6 to assist the deceased. Accordingly, they proceeded to Kadaladi and completed the construction work entrusted by the deceased. Subsequently, when the workers were preparing to return to their native place to celebrate Vinayaga Chaturthi festival on 25.08.2017, they demanded payment of wages from the deceased on 24.08.2017. The deceased, however, refused to pay the wages, which led to a heated altercation between the deceased and the first accused. Though PW1 attempted to pacify them, the dispute remained unresolved. Thereafter, all of them proceeded to Kariyapatti village, where once again a quarrel erupted regarding the payment of wages. During the course of this altercation, the first accused challenged the deceased, stating that he would “see him” at Kariyapatti. Later, at about 11.00 p.m., all of them reached Kariyapatti. In the meantime, the deceased went to his house, obtained a sum of Rs.3,000/- from his wife, and paid the same to PW6 towards wages. Thereafter, the deceased, PW1, and PW6 hired an auto driven by PW3 to drop PW6 at NGO Colony. Subsequently, they assembled near the house of PW9 situated on Kariyapatti–Kallikudi Road. At that juncture, the first accused arrived from the opposite direction armed with a sickle (MO1) and attacked the deceased. When PW1 intervened, he also sustained injuries. Both the deceased and PW1 were immediately taken to the Government Hospital, Kariyapatti, and thereafter referred to the Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai, owing to the grievous nature of their injuries. Upon receiving intimation from the hospital, PW21, the Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Kariyapatti Police Station, proceeded to the hospital at about 3.00 a.m. on 25.08.2017 and recorded the statement of PW1, the injured eyewitness. Based on the same, a case was registered in Crime No.314 of 2017 initially under Section 307 IPC , and the First Information Report was forwarded to the jurisdictional Magistrate and the Inspector of Police (PW24). PW24 took up the investigation and visited the scene of occurrence at about 6.40 a.m. on 25.08.2017. He prepared the observation mahazar (Ex.P2) and rough sketch (Ex.P14) in the presence of witnesses PW9 and PW10. He also recovered blood-stained earth (MO5) and sample earth (MO6) from the scene. Thereafter, he examined PW1, PW2, PW6, and other witnesses and recorded their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. On 26.08.2017, upon receiving information regarding the death of Senthil Kumar, the offence was altered from Section 307 IPC to Sections 302 and 120-B IPC, an