SEKAR Vs. STATE BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second accused in S.C. No. 24/2002 on the file of Court of Additional Sessions (Fast Track Court -I), Erode is the appellant in this appeal. He stands convicted in that sessions case under Section 302 I.P.C. for which he stands sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. Along with him, two more persons arrayed as A1 and A3, were tried in the same sessions case for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. and they also, at the end of the trial, stand convicted for the said offence and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. We called for a report from the registry as to whether A -1 and A -3 had filed any appeal questioning their conviction and the report is that they have not challenged their conviction in any manner known to law. In other words, there is no appeal at the instance of A -1 and A -3 in S.C. No. 24/2002 on the file of the Lower Court referred to above. Heard Mr. V.K. Muthusamy, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Mr. V.M.R. Rajendran, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that at about 3.30 a.m. on 9.6.2001, near a video shop called Rainbow Video Shop falling within the jurisdiction of the investigating police station in this case, A -2 killed the victim in this case by name Rangasamy by dropping a big stone on his head and during the same transaction, A -1, using a knife, caused an injury on the victims calf -muscle as well as on his right earlobe and A -3, with a stick, indiscriminately beat all over his body. That is how, as already stated, A -2 stands charged, tried and convicted for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and the remaining accused for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. In substantiation of their case, the prosecution examined P.W. s 1 to 12 besides marking Exs -P1 to P16. The defence neither brought in any oral evidence nor documentary evidence before court. The prosecution had examined P.W. s 1 to 4 as eye -witnesses to the occurrence. We summarise hereunder the evidence of P.W. 1 about the occurrence proper. He is a resident of Chittode doing business in textiles. He goes from place to place, town to town in selling his goods namely, textiles. He carries on business along with P.Ws. 2 and 4, who always go together to all the places. A -1 to A -3 are their customers. On the previous night of the occurrence day, he along with P.Ws.2 and 4 went to see a late night cinema and after the film was over, they came to the tea shop of P.W. 3 located opposite to a private hospital called Thangam Hospital and were taking tea. It was around 3 or 3.15 a.m. on that morning namely, 9.6.2001. A -1 is employed in the tea shop of P.W. 3 and he was not there at that time. They asked P.W. 3 about the whereabouts of A -1 and the answer was, he just left. They noticed a commotion opposite to the Rainbow Video Shop located near Thangam Hospital. Accordingly, all the three went out and saw and at that time, they found A -1 to A -3 threatening a 30 year old male. A -1 was armed with an aruval and there was a conversation between them. Immediately, A -2, holding the collar of the said individual pushed him down. The victim stood up and again talked, which resulted in A -2 giving a command to finish him off. Immediately, A -1 with the aruval in his hand, cut on the right earlobe as well as on the left leg calf -muscle of the victim. A -3 took up a log available there and indiscriminately beat all over the body of the victim and A -2, picking up a big stone available there, dropped it on the head of the victim. The witness, P.Ws.2 and 4 along with P.W. 3 went there and watched. A -1 ran away, with the weapon of offence in his hand. A -2 and A -3 also ran away. They found the injured unconscious. As the witness had to collect a baggage coming in private travels bus at 5 a.m. and as it was already late, he went to collect the baggage. He collected the baggage at about 5 a.m. and then came back to the scene of occurrence to find out what happened thereafter. The victim was lying dead and there was a huge crowd. Since, he did know to write, he asked the person standing nearby to write down the complaint narrated by him which he took and gave it to P.W. 10, the Sub -Inspector of Police. The said complaint is Ex -Pi. M.O.s 1 to 3 are the respective weapons of offences in the hands of A -1, A -3 and A -2. P.W. 2 had given evidence regarding the occurrence proper in total corroboration to the oral evidence of P.W. 1. P.W. 4 would only state that he saw around 7 p.m. on 8.6.91, all the three accused chatting with each other; that he overheard their conversation to finish off Rangasamy the victim in this case and on being threatened, he left the place.

(3.) P .W. 9 accordingly accompanied the dead body with the requisition to the hospital for postmortem. He was present throughout postmortem. After postmortem, he removed M.O.s 8 to 10 from the dead body and handed over the same in the investigating police station along with his special report Ex -P11. P.W. 6, on receipt of Ex -P5 requisition and the dead body, commenced postmortem at 4.25 p.m. on 9.6.2001. During postmortem, he found various symptoms as noted by him in Ex -P6, the postmortem report. The symptoms are as hereunder: External Injuries: