KADAMANIAN @ MANIKANDAN Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Kadamanian @ Manikandan
STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE
Click here to view full judgement.
JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, J. -
(1.) The prosecution in the instant case was lodged against the appellant herein - Kadamanian @ Manikandan, as well as, against
co -accused - I.T. Manian @ Manikanda, for the offences under
Sections 201, 302, 376 and 404 of the Indian Penal Code. The
aforesaid offences were allegedly committed by the accused with
reference to M. Jayalakshmi.
(2.) As per the prosecution version, M.Jayalakshmi went missing at 7 a.m. on 6.9.2007, having left her residence to answer
the call of nature. Since she did not return, a missing person's
report was lodged on 7.9.2007 by her father P.Matheswaran at
Namakkam Kumarapalayam Police Station. It is also relevant to
mention, that in the first information report registered on
7.9.2007, the complainant had attached the photograph of M. Jayalakshmi, and had also indicated for her identification, that
she was wearing a green colour jacket and saree. It was also
expressly mentioned, that she was wearing a nose -stud.
On 9.9.2007, a dead body of a female, was found by a
sweeper, Natarajan PW4. Based on the recovery of the dead body,
another first information report came to be lodged. On 18.9.2007,
the parents of the deceased Jayalakshmi, identified the clothing
and other artifacts, recovered with the dead body, as belonging to
their daughter. It is also relevant to indiacate, that the
aforesaid identification was affirmed by none other than the mother
of the deceased, Vedammal PW2. The mother identified her
daughter from the photograph of the dead body.
(3.) The first needle of suspicion with reference to the appellant herein - Kadamanian @ Manikandan emerged from the
statement of the investigating officer, Arumugam PW20 dated
21.01.2008, affirming with Shanmugam PW6, that the appellant had been seen close to the place of occurrence. Consequent upon the
needle of suspicion having been pointed at the appellant, the
appellant allegedly made an extra -judicial confession to
R.V.Alagurajan PW12. The aforesaid extra -judicial confession can
be extracted from his statement made by R.V. Alagurajan PW12, to
the police. A relevant portion thereof is being reproduced
"...My name is Manikandan. I am also addressed as Keda Manian. Name of my wife is Durgadevi. I have one son and a daughter. My native place is Karanthai near Tanjavur. I have come to Bavani many years back and settled here. I am engaged in the profession of driving autorikshaw. From 1.9.2007 onwards, I am running share autorikshaw bearing registration number T.N. 38 Q 1311 Annamalai of Krishnampalayam taking on hire basis along with I.T. Mani. One Mubarak take the collection from me every day and deposit with the owner on two installments. Myself and I.T. Manian have the habit enjoying the prostitutes who approach bus stand area. On the last 8.9.07 when myself and I.T. Manian were operating share autorikshaw, one woman boarded the share autorikshaw from the bus stand. She did not get down till the last even after other passengers got down from the autorikshaw. When asked her name, she innocently told that her name as Jayalakshmi and she was from Komarapalayam. She also told that she did not have any money. When myself and Mani told her that we will take her to her village for which she agreed. On the way, myself and Mani planned to enjoy that woman. We came to share autorikshaw stand near bus stand and handed over the collection to Mubarak and left that place. When Mubarak enquired, Mani told that woman was his relative lady. Then on the way, I along went to a brancy shop in Nachippa street and consumed liquor. Then all three of us consumed food in the nearby Amutham mess. When we came out, it was slightly drizzling. We told that lady that we can leave after the rain stops and after passing through public toilet and took her to old municipal ward office. We engaged discussion with that lady and told her to compromise to our desire and asked her to lay with us. She refused and started to shout and then we took her to the land on the southern side. There, we tried to remove her blouse and saree, she shouted. That lady was a strong woman. We could not perform what we planned. I got annoyed and picked up a stick from nearby and inserted twice or thrice in her private part. Her shout mellowed down. Mani told that "let us leave". From not to find further identification of the lady, I smashed her face with a stone. Mani also picked up another stone and threw it on the face of that woman. We stripped that woman's saree and petty coat and threw them out. We came to know that she was dead. We thought that the nose pin worn by her would disclose her identity. I removed the nose pin and kept it with myself. Then both of us came and picked up the share autorikshaw and left it in the workshop of the owner at Moolapattarai. On the next day, I came and asked Mani whether police made any enquiry with him for which Mani replied in negative. I thought that Mubarak may suspect us and indirectly told Mani, if any one say anything, let us slit the throat. There after, we went to the vacant plot near the municipality Kalyana Mandapam and put the nose pin removed from that woman in a plastic bag and concealed it there and then for the next 5 days, I did not run the autorikshaw. Therefore, I went to jail in connection with two case in Bavani. I came to know that police were in search me suspecting me. I was scarred and have to you and surrender myself." ;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.