IN RE : VARADA KOUNDER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Varada Gounder (A.2) appeals against his conviction for offences under Sections 341 and 302 (Part II) I.P.C. Guruswaml (deceased) was a young man of 22 years. He had sold some paddy without his mother's knowledge about two months prior to the occurrence. On Monday the 9th September 1968, Guruswami had sold paddy at Tindivanam for Rs. 18-30, P.W. 5 had accompanied him then. P.W. 1 demanded the four marakkals of paddy, kept by P.W 1's brother, from Garuswami (deceased). But Guruswami left the place and he was followed by P.W. 1. P.W. 5 happened to be there sod he followed Garuswami (deceased) for the purpose of making a demand for Re. 0-8-0 from Garuswami. A-1, brother of A-2 fallowed Guruswami. When P.W. 1 was rear the Mariamman temple, Garuswami west away saying he had only disposed of his own paddy. P.W.1 and the first accused therefore followed Guruswami who had proceeded to the culvert situated near the Mariamman temple. P.W. 2 Subbarayan and P.W. 3, Ezhumalal, were working in their respective fields nearby. The first accused asked P.W. 2 to catch hold of Guruswami (deceased) saying that he was going away after stealing paddy. P.W. 2 accosted Guruswami. He told the witness that he had only taken his own paddy. P.W. 2 therefore suggested to the first accused that be might go away; but the first accused insisted that P.W. 2 should catch hold of Guruswami since P.W. 2 did not know the real story. P.Ws. 1 and 2 caught hold of the deceased. Varada Rounder (A-2), the Appellant herein, who was working nearby in his filed case with a spade, M.O. 1. Accused 1 and 2 caught hold of Guruswami (deceased) and tore his shirt, M.O. 2 which he was wearing and tied both his hands behind him with M.O. 2. The first accused slapped the deceased on his neck. A-1 and A-2 also beat him with their hands. The second accused (the Appellant herein) bit Guruswami on the left side of his head with the handle of a spade. The deceased became unconscious after receiving these blows and fee was dragged and taken to the Bajanai Madam nearby. P.W. 5 speaks to third accused coming at the end of the incident. According to P.Ws. 1 and 2. A-3 also gave two blows on the rape of Guruswami (deceased) and joined the first accused in dragging him to the village.

(2.) P.W. 7, Rajappan lived in the village Beedheri where the occurrence took place. The place of occurrence is nearly a mile away from Tindivanam. P.W. 7 is a Councillor of the Tindivenam Municipality. A-1 went to him at 9 a.m. and wanted him to enquire into the matter of Garuswami (deceased) having committed theft of paddy. P.W. 7 went to the Bajanal Madam and saw Garuswami standing there with his hands tied. But Garuswami was speechless. When P.W. 7 untied his hands he fell down. P.W. 7 was treated as hostile by the prosecution for he had not only given a written complaint, Ex. P. 2 to P.W. 11, Head constable attached to Tindivanam Police Station but had also produced the injured before him. The injured Guruswami was sent to the hospital by P.W. 11. P.W. 6, the Civil Assistant Surgeon, examined the injured and he did not notice any external injury on the deceased. But the injured Guruswami was not conscious. Guruswami died at about 5-45 a.m. the next day without recovering consciousness. P.W. 5 missed notieing the contagion on the left temporal region of the injured Guruswami on account of the thick growth of hair.

(3.) P.W. 9 Civil Assistant Surgeon, conducted the autopay at 11-30 a.m. on 10th Sptember 1968, He noticed the eontusron on the left temporal region and on dissection found (1) collection of blood clots ever the left temporal bone; (2) an irregular linear fracture 2 inches long on left temporal bone; and (3) Haemorrhage over the dura mater of left temporal region and also on the left side of the brain. He was opinion that death was the result of shock and haemorrhage due to the external injury and its corresponding internal injuries. In his opinion, the said injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.