M.JEYAPAUL, J. - (1.) The single accused, who was convicted for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment, moves this present appeal.
(2.) On the side of the prosecution, P.Ws. 1 to 14 were examined and Exhibits P-1 to P-14 and M.Os. 1 to 6 were marked. There is neither oral nor documentary evidence on the side of the accused.
(3.) The brief case of the prosecution as unfolded by the witnesses reads as follows:- (i) The deceased Shanthi is the mother of P.W.I Geetha, P.W.2 Kabil and P.W.3 Mohana. The husband of Shanthi died about five years prior to the occurrence. Shanthi, thereafter, developed illicit intimacy with the accused Shankar who was an auto driver. P.W.I Geetha was married to one Kutty. She lived along with her husband in a separate house. P.W.2 Kabil and P.W.3 Mohana also resided along with P. W. 1 Geetha. The accused was a drunkard. He used to pick up frequent quarrel with Shanthi. (ii) On 14.2.2008 at about 8. pm Shanthi came down to the house of P.W.I which was located at Palaniandavar Koil Street, Perambur. Shanthi informed P.W.I to P.W.3, her children that the accused harassed her having taken liquor and therefore, she had decided not to go and live with him again. P.W.I appeased her saying that the current life was her own making and therefore, she should put up with such a wretched life. (iii) The accused came down to the house of P.W.I searching for Shanthi. The accused asked P.W.I to send Shanthi along with him. As the accused was fully drunk and had tortured her mother, P.W.I, at the first instance, refused to send her mother to the house of the accused. But, the accused promised that he would not harass Shanthi thereafter. He appealed to P.W.I to send Shanthi along with him. Believing such assurance of the accused, P.W.I sent Shanthi to the house of the accused. (iv) P.W.I and P.W.2, having suspected some foul play, got up in the early morning on 15.2.2008 and went to the house of the accused which is located two kilometres away from her house at about 5. am. When P.Ws.l and 2 opened the main gate, they heard the quarrel between the accused and the deceased. The quarrel continued for about two minutes. The accused pushed down her mother and having taken a small crowbar M.O.I, attacked Shanthi twice on her head and caused instantaneous death and sped away from the scene of occurrence along with the weapon of offence. (v) P.Ws. 1 and 2 went inside the house of the accused and found the deceased dead in a pool of blood. (vi) P.W.I rushed to the Sembiyam Police Station at about 6. am on 15.2.2008 and lodged a complaint, Exhibit P1 to P.W.13 R.Silambu Chelvan, Sub-Inspector of Police attached to the said police station. P.W.13, having received the complaint, Exhibit P1, registered a case in Crime No. 180/2008 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and prepared the printed FIR, Exhibit P11. He despatched the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate and copies thereof to the higher officials. (vii) P.W. 14 K.Sivamani, Inspector of Police attached to Sembiyam Police Station, took up the case for investigation. He went to the scene of occurrence, prepared observation mahazar, Exhibit P2 in the presence of P.W.7 Mariadoss and another witness and drew rough sketch reflecting the scene of occurrence. He recovered blood stained tile M.O.2 and sample tile M.O.3 under relevant seizure mahazar, Exhibit PI3 in the presence of the very same witnesses. He also arranged to take photograph of the scene of occurrence through a photographer. (viii) P.W. 14 conducted inquest in the presence of the witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared inquest report, Exhibit P14. (ix) P.W.14 examined the witnesses Geetha, Kabil, Mohana, Kutty, Chandra, Sumathy, Kumar and Sasidharan and recorded their statements. (x) On 16.2.2008 at about 9. am, the accused was arrested at Madhavaram High Road in the presence of P.W. 10 Parthasarathy and another witness by name Shanmugasundaram. On the basis of the admissible portion, Exhibit P6 found in the confession statement voluntarily given by the accused, the crowbar M.0.1 was recovered from a thorny bush near the EB office located at Madhavaram High Road. The accused was, thereafter, sent for judicial remand. The material objects were also sent for chemical examination. (xi) P.W.9 Dr.Udayashankar, having received the request from P.W. 14, commenced post mortem on the dead body of Shanthi at 11.30 am on 16.2.2008. He found the following injuries on the dead body of Shanthi. "Cut injuries : Clear cut injuries with well defined margins seen over (1) left ear 4 x 1 cm horizontally. (2) Two cut injuries over the left temporal region 6x2 cm, 4x2 cm with 3 inches apart seen one below the other (3) left parietal region 6x2x1 cm, Scalp Sub-scalp clots seen over the left parietal and right temporal regions Skull Fracture Posterior cranial fossa at the junction of the middle and posterior cranial fossa. Brain: Blood clots seen in all the lobes. Heart: Blood clots seen in all the chambers. Lungs: Both lungs oedematous and adherent to the inter costal muscles. Larynx, Trachea, Liver, Spleen, Kidneys: Normal Hyoid Bone: Intact. Stomach: Empty. Bladder, Uterus: Normal & empty. Pelvis: Normal & intact. Scalp, bones, membranes & brain - vide injury column. Spinal column: Normal and intact." He opined in the post mortem report, Exhibit P-4 that the deceased Shanthi appeared to have died of complications of head injuries. (xii) P.W.I 4, Inspector of Police received M.0.4 saree, M.0.5 jacket, M.0.6 petticoat from P.W.8 Davis, post mortem Constable who seized the same from the dead body after post mortem examination was over. (xiii) P.W.12, Kamalatchi Krishnamoorthy, the Serologist has spoken to the serology report, Exhibit P10 issued by her. (xiv) P.W. 14, having examined all the witnesses in this case, completed investigation and laid final report as against the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. (xv) The accused completely denied the incriminating circumstances spoken to by the witnesses examined on the side of the prosecution when he was questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He came out with a lengthy written statement when he was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is virtually a written argument submitted by the accused. At any rate, it is found that he has categorically denied each and every incriminating circumstance spoken to by the prosecution witnesses.;