Raj @ Selvaraj Vs The Inspector of Police

¶1

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Reserved on 11.11.2025 Pronounced on 27.11.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

and

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022 1. Raj @ Selvaraj : Appellant/Accused 1 in Crl.A(MD) No.527 of 2022 2. Suresh : Appellant/Accused 2 in Crl.A(MD) No.528 of 2022 3.Raj : Appellant/Accused 7 in Crl.A(MD) No.530 of 2022 4. Raja : Appellant/Accused 4 in Crl.A(MD) No.530 of 2022 5. Murugan : Appellant/Accused 6 in Crl.A(MD) No.532 of 2022 6. Arul Perumal 7. Vaithilingam : Appellants/Accused 5&8 in Crl.A(MD) No.711 of 2022 Vs. The Inspector of Police, Alangulam Police Station, Tenkasi District : Respondent/Complainant in both appeals

¶8

1

¶9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶10

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶11

Common Prayer:-These Criminal Appeal have been filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records and set aside the judgment dated 12.07.2022 made in S.C.No.104 of 2015 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge(FTC) Tenkasi

¶12

For Appellants : Mr.P.M. Bazil(In Crl.A(MD) No.527 of 2022) : Mr.R.Anand (In Crl.A(MD) No.528 of 2022) :Mr.R.Vinoth Bharathi (In Crl.A(MD) Nos.530 & 532 of 2022)

¶13

: Dr.R.Alagumani (In Crl.A(MD) No.531 of 2022) : Mr.G.Karuppasamy Pandian (In Crl.A(MD) No.711 of 2022)

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar

¶15

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶16

C O M M O N J U D G M E N T

¶17

P.VELMURUGAN, J.,

¶18

These Criminal Appeal are directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge(FTC) Tenkasi in S.C.No.104 of 2015 dated 12.07.2022

¶19

2

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶22

For sake of convenience the accused are referred to as per their

¶23

rank before the trial Court. Since all the appeals are arising out of a common judgment they are clubbed and heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

¶24

By the above said judgment, the trial Court convicted A1, A2,

¶25

A4 to A8 for the offence under Section 148 IPC and sentenced them to undergo S.I for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each i/d to undergo S.I for three months each, and convicted A1, A2, A4 to A8 for the offence under Section 341 IPC and sentenced them to undergo S.I. for one month each and convicted A2, A4 to A8 are for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced them to undergo each Imprisonment for Life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each i/d to undergo R.I. for two years each and convicted A1 for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 IPC and sentenced him to undergo Imprisonment for Life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- i/d R.I. for two years and the sentences of the accused persons shall run concurrently.

¶26

3

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶29

The case of the prosecution in brief:-

¶30

4.1 The complainant's brother namely Karuppasamy (deceased)

¶31

was residing at Alangulam and was doing real estate business and building contractor job and the sons of one Subramanian namely Suresh and his brothers Raj @ Selvaraj and Raja are doing brick business and doing business by selling river sand and through this business there is a touch between the deceased and Suresh. Six months prior to the occurrence, in the Alangulam bus stand, accused Suresh and his brothers Raja, Raj @ Selvaraj and their cousin the deceased accused Muthuraj abused Karuppasamy with filthy language. And on coming to know this, the complainant Muthukumar compromised the matter. Thereafter one month prior to the occurrence, the sand lorry of Suresh was seized by the Police and accused persons are under the belief that Karuppasamy was the reason for that and due to this motive, the said Suresh, his brother Raja and his cousin the deceased accused Muthuraj and his friends Arul Perumal, Murugan, Raj and Vaithilingam quarrelled with Karuppasamy at Alangulam Bus stand and the complainant warned the said persons. Hence, a motive developed between the deceased and Suresh and their brothers. Due to this, the

¶32

4

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶35

accused persons and the accused Muthuraj had a common intention to kill Karuppasamy, hence on 12.09.2012 at 8.45 P.M. in Alangulam – Puthupatti Road on the Southern side of Hindu Nadar Funeral vehicle stand, the accused persons unlawfully assembled together and at that time the said Karuppasamy and Thamaraiselvan were proceeding in one Motorcycle and in the another motorcycle the complainant and one Subburaj were following them and these accused persons who were already present in the spot each with aruval wrongfully restrained the victim and A1 induced the other accused persons by saying that " to kill him" and on hearing the same all the accused persons indiscriminately attacked the deceased with deadly weapons due to which the deceased Karuppasamy died on the spot in the pool of blood. Thereafter based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the respondent police registered a case against the accused persons in Crime No. 426 of 2012 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 294(b),302 506(2) IPC.

¶36

4.2. After completion of the investigation, the respondent police

¶37

laid the charge sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi, and the same was taken on file as P.R.C. No.28 of 2013.

¶38

5

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶41

4.3. On the appearance of the accused, the provisions of Section 207 of Cr.P.C. were complied with, and the case was committed to the Court of Session, where it was taken on file in S.C.No.322 of 2018 and made over to the III Additional Sessions Court, Tirunelveli for trial under Section 209(A) of Cr.P.C. The trial Court framed charges against the first accused for the offence punishable under Sections 148,341,294(b), 506(2) 302 r/w.34 of IPC and A2, A4 and A8 for the offences punishable under Sections 148,341,302 of IPC. When this case was posted for examination of Prosecution side witnesses under section 231 Cr.P.C, at this stage, this case was transferred to the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge(FTC) Tenkasi as per the order of the Hon'ble Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli in A.No.40/2017 dt. 24.01.2017

¶42

4.4. In order to substantiate the case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined 19 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.19, and 41 exhibits were marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.41, and 16 material objects were exhibited as M.O.1 to M.O.16.

¶43

6

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶45

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶46

4.5. After examination of the prosecution witnesses, when the appellants were questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the incriminating circumstances appearing against them, they denied the charges as false. No witness was examined on the side of the accused, nor was any document marked.

¶47

The trial Court, after considering the evidence on record and hearing both sides, by judgment dated 12.07.2022, convicted the appellants and sentenced them as detailed in Paragraph No.3 supra. Challenging the above-said conviction and sentence, the appellants have filed the present appeal.

¶48

The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that there is no independent witness in this case and the alleged witnesses are related witnesses and even though P.W.1 has stated that the deceased Karuppasamy went along with P.W. 10 one Thamaraiselvan but he had turned hostile and he did not support the prosecution. The evidence of PW 1 and PW 2 and their presence is doubtful. The conduct of P.W.1 and P.W.2 is abnormal.

¶49

7

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶51

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶52

He would further submit that PW 1 has stated that before lodging complaint, he had noted the numbers of three bikes in which the accused persons had fled away and again he did not come to the spot and the Inspector of Police was not in the station and the dead body was removed from the occurrence place even before he reached the occurrence place and he lost his bike key and he did not ask for the bike of Thamaraiselvan. The evidence of PW 2 is contrary to the evidence of PW 1. Further PW1 has stated that after lodging complaint, they went outside the police station and stood nearby the compound wall again in the bus stop they remained for 2 hours which is unnatural and unbelievable. PW 5 and PW 10 were nearby the dead body and they have not stated why they did not proceed to the occurrence place and therefore, the presence of PW1 and PW2 and their conduct is abnormal. He would further submit that P.W.1 has stated that there are houses nearby the occurrence place which was also confirmed by PW 2 and investigation officer but the neighbours were not examined. Ex. P1 complaint and the FIR which is marked as Ex. P.22 are fabricated by the police.

¶53

8

¶54

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶55

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶56

Further PW.1 and PW2 have stated that they have lodged complaint at 10.00 PM and on that basis FIR was registered. But in the FIR, in column 15, the date and time of sending the FIR to the court was not mentioned. PW 14 had stated that he received the FIR on 12.09.2012 at 10.30 PM and on 13.09.02012 at 12.30 PM, he had handed over the FIR to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri who was in charge of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi and further stated that he had met the Inspector of Police on 12.09.2012 at 22.30 hrs in the police station and the Inspector had given the express FIR in the police station. He further submitted that PW 16 who registered the FIR had stated that he issued the FIR to the Inspector of Police, through the H.C 1518 Alexander. Therefore, it is established that the Inspector is not in the station and PWI had also stated that Inspector was not in the station as well as in the occurrence place. The evidence relating to FIR and complaint is contrary to each other. Further, the Head constable had stated that he boarded on the bus from Alangulam to Tenkasi on 13.09.2012 at 5.00 AM. Having received the FIR on 12.09.2012 at 10.30 PM. and stated that he only boarded on the bus on 5.00 AM the next day, is unbelievable, therefore, the FIR and complaint is registered only after 9.00 AM on 13.09.2012.

¶57

9

¶58

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶59

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶60

When the FIR and complaint is doubtful the entire case of the prosecution fails.

¶61

He would further submit that no case was registered for the alleged two occurrences as stated by the Prosecution. The recovery of Material Objects was not proved and the arrest was also not proved. PW1 and PW2 had criminal cases and therefore their evidence is unbelievable and the defence case is more probable than prosecution story, because PWI and PW2 in their evidence had admitted that there are quarrels between Konar community and Nadar community and there was no fair investigation and the prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

¶62

He would further submit that P.W.1 though being own brother of the deceased candidly admitted in his cross examination that neither he nor PW2 tried to prevent the occurrence by interfering. Rather both PWI and PW2 were standing simply' as mere spectators. Further PWI admitted that he did not inform about the occurrence to the wife of the deceased nor anybody. This is nothing but un-natural conduct of the

¶63

10

¶64

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶65

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶66

PWI and PW2 against the normal course of human conduct. He would further submit that PW1 and PW2 followed the deceased in a two wheeler and they happened to see the occurrence. The reason for following deceased by PW1 and PW2 is stated as if PW1 had given a CD of video game to the son of the deceased and to operate that CD PW1 and PW2 had gone by following the deceased since the son of the deceased could not operate that CD. The reason assigned by the PW1 and PW2 to show their presence at the scene of occurrence seems to be not only a make belief but also mere ipse-dixit since that reason has not been substantiated and not even probabilized by any witnesses or by any material. Therefore, the witnesses namely PW1 and PW2 can very well be labelled as chance witnesses and they were planted by the investigation officer only to suit the prosecution case.

¶67

He would further submit that once there is no conviction for the common object preceded by unlawful assembly envisaged in section 149 of IPC, there cannot be a conviction under section 148 of IPC. In the case on hand, the trial court did not come to the conclusion that there was common object preceded by unlawful assembly. So, the conviction 11

¶68

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶69

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶70

under section 148 of IPC does not ipso facto survives sans the conviction under section 149 of IPC. Moreover, to prove the charge under section 148 of IPC, it is essential to let in evidence to show that accused wielded deadly weapons during the occurrence. Even though PW1 and PW2 stated that the appellants wielded the deadly weapons in their hands, prosecution did not recover any weapon from the appellants and the weapons alleged to be wielded by the appellants are not specifically identified by PW1 and PW2. On that score, the conviction under section 148 of IPC against the appellants is liable to be set aside.

¶71

The trial court has not considered the evidence of PW2 in a proper perspective. Though it is claimed that the occurrence took place at the night hours and PW2 also claimed that he had seen the occurrence on the light source available from a mercury lamp in the place of occurrence, there was no evidence to show the availability of light source at the scene of occurrence. Inasmuch as the occurrence took place at the pitch of dark, it is incumbent upon the prosecution to show the light source available at the scene of occurrence and that enabled the witnesses to witness the occurrence. In the case on hand, the prosecution

¶72

12

¶73

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶74

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶75

has miserably failed to prove the factum of light source which cause serious flaw in the evidence of witnesses.

¶76

He would further submit that there is an inordinate delay in transmitting the FIR to the Magistrate concerned. The FIR was registered at 22.30 hrs on 12.09.2012. However, that FIR was forwarded to the Magistrate only on 13.09.2012 at 12.30 hrs after lapse of 14 hrs. Further the trial court failed to consider the vital point that the evidence of PW1 and PW2 is of parrot like in nature and their narration of the occurrence seems to be as such. It is humanly impossible to vouch safe the overt acts of each of the accused as PW1 and PW2 in a case where the occurrence lasted 10 to 15 minutes. Moreover, PW1 admitted that the deadly blows were mounted simultaneously by all the accused. This being the case, PW1 and PW2 could not narrate the course of occurrence in such a meticulous way. Therefore the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 is highly doubtful and their presence in the place of occurrence is also highly doubtful and they have not seen the occurrence as narrated by them and the trial Court failed to consider all the contradictions and also unnatural conduct of the witnesses and convicted the appellants solely

¶77

13

¶78

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶79

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶80

based on the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 who are related witnesses and therefore the judgment of conviction passed by the trial Court is liable to be set aside and the appeal is to be allowed.

¶81

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubts. The trial Court has rightly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence and recorded conviction. The evidence of P.W.1 and 2 is cogent, consistent and credible. Though P.W.1 and 2 are related to the deceased it does not mean that their evidence is to be disbelieved. P.W.1 and P.W. 2 have clearly stated reasons why they proceeded towards the deceased and also they established the motive for murder and also the evidence of P.W.1 to 5 clearly stated the motive for murder. P.W.1 and 2 are the eye witnesses to the occurrence and they have specifically stated about the overt act of each of the appellants and the recovery was also proved and even the post mortem report clearly shows that the deceased sustained multiple injuries all over the body and how those injuries were caused to the deceased through deadly weapons. The biological report and the serological report also proved that the blood detected in the material

¶82

14

¶83

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶84

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶85

objects are human blood. In the case of eyewitness motive need not be proved as in the case of circumstantial evidence, however, in this case motive is also clearly established and the eyewitness have clearly spoken about the occurrence and also the medical evidence corroborated the same.

¶86

He would further submit that though the learned counsel vehemently contended about the conduct of P.W.1 and P.W.2 and the delay in filing the complaint and registering the First Information Report and sending to the Court, it is a case of brutal murder and more than seven persons gathered together with deadly weapons with a common intention and they brutally attacked the deceased. P.W.1 and 2 saw the said brutal attack and it will take some time to recover from the shock and therefore the delay in filing the complaint and registering the case cannot be fatal to the case of prosecution and it will not go to the root of the case. Though there are contradictions regarding finding of the vehicle and also removing the body to the hospital that will not create doubts and mere flaws or lapses in the investigation the prosecution case would not be affected on the sole ground of technicality. When

¶87

15

¶88

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶89

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶90

there are no eye witnesses in this case and witnesses also proved the motive and further recovery is established, since because some of the witnesses turned hostile that does not mean that the case of prosecution is totally false and therefore the prosecution in this case through both oral and documentary evidence and also through scientific evidence proved its case beyond all reasonable doubts. The contradictions pointed out are only minor contradictions and will not go to the root of the prosecution. Further he would submit that one of the grounds taken by the appellant is that the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 is parrot like in nature and this will not improve the case of the defence . However the presence of P.W.1 and P.W. 2 have been established and also the motive has also been clearly established and therefore the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts and therefore there is no merit in the appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶91

We have considered the submissions of the learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and have consciously gone through the evidence and materials on record.

¶92

16

¶93

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶94

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶95

P.W.1 is the eyewitness in this case and he has given a complaint/Ex.P.1 before the respondent police and based on which the case was registered and after investigation charge sheet was laid . Even in the complaint P.W.1 has specifically stated about the overt act of each

¶96

of the appellants. For better appreciation the relevant portion of the complaint given by P.W.1 is extracted hereunder:

¶97

“ ehq;fs; Myq;Fsk; to GJg;gl;b Nuhl;by; ,e;J ehlhh;

¶98

rKjhaj;jpw;Fg; ghj;jpag;gl;l ,Wjp ahj;jpiu Ch;jp epWj;Jk;

¶99

fl;blj;jpd; rw;W njd;Gwk; nrd;W nfhz;bUe;j NghJ Nkw;gb uh[_ (v) nry;tuh[;> RNu];> uh[h> Kj;Juh[;> mUs;ngUkhs;> KUfd; uh[;> gpuG> itj;jpypq;fk; Kjyhdth;fs; ifapy; mhpthSld; vd; mz;zd; nrd;w igf;if gwpj;J ,tid ntl;b nfhs;Sq;fs; vd;W uh[; (v) nry;tuh[; nrhy;yTk; uh[h mhpthshy; vdJ mz;zid ,lJ gf;f fOj;jpy; ntl;bdhd;. RNu]; mhpthshy; vd; mz;zid jiyapd; eLtpYk; gpd;dhYk; ntl;bdhd;. Kj;Juh[; vdJ mz;zid fPo;

¶100

cjl;bYk; ,lJ GUtj;jpYk; mhpthshy; ntl;bdhd;. mUs;ngUkhs; khh;Gf;F fPNo ,lJgf;fKk; khh;Gf;F NkNy ,lJgf;fKk; mhpthshy; ntl;bdhd;. KUfd; mhpthshy; KJfpw;Fg; gpd;dhy; ntl;bdhd;. uh[; tyJ gf;f G[j;jpYk; tyJ if kzp fl;bw;F fPOk; mhpthshy; ntl;bdhd;. gpuG ,lJ fhy; Kl;bd; fPNo mhpthshy; ntl;bdhd;. itj;jpypq;fk; ,lJfhy; fuz;ilapd; gpd;Gwk; mhpthshy; ntl;bdhd;.

¶101

17

¶102

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶103

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶104

uj;j nts;sj;jpy; tpOe;j vdJ mz;zd; me;j ,lj;jpNyNa

¶105

JbJbj;J ,we;J Nghdhh;. ,ij fz;l ehDk; vdJ ikj;Jdh; Rg;Guh[_k; Nkw;gb egh;fisg; ghh;j;J rj;jk; Nghl;lgb XbNdhk;. Njtbah ktNd gf;fj;Jy te;jh cd;idAk; ntl;b nfhd;WLNthk;y vd;W uh[; (v) nry;tuh[; mhpthshy; kpul;bdhd;. clNd RNu]{k; uh[hTk; Kj;Juh[{k; TN76M3135 Unicorn igf;fpYk;> mUs;ngUkhYk;

¶106

KUfDk;> uh[{k; TN72K7921 Kawasaki igf;fpYk; gpuGk;

¶107

itj;jpypq;fKk; TN67B2415 Yamaha 135 igf;fpYk; Vwp MAjq;fSld; mq;fpUe;J nrd;W tpl;ldh;. gpd; ehd; Myq;Fsk; fhty; epiyak; te;J ele;j rk;gtj;Jf;F ,e;j Gfhh; kD nfhLf;fpNwd; ”

¶108

In order to prove the complaint, the defacto complainant who

¶109

had set the law in motion was examined as P.W.1. P.W.1 in his evidence has clearly stated about the specific overt act as against all the appellants. For better appreciation the evidence of P.W.1 is extracted hereunder:

¶110

“ Myq;Fsk; GJg;gl;b Nuhl;by; ,e;J ehlhh; rKjhaj;jpw;F

¶111

ghj;jpag;gl;l Nuhl;bw;F fPo;Gwk; ,Wjp ahj;jpiu tz;b epw;Fk; ,lj;jpw;F njd;Gwk; mUe;jjpah; fhyzpNuhL fl;lhFk; Nuhl;by; vjphpfs; midtUk; MSf;nfhL mhpthSld; epd;Wf;nfhz;bUe;jhh;fs;. mg;nghOJ vd; mz;zd; nrd;w igf;if vjphpfs; Nuhl;bd; ,lJ Gwk; kwpj;jhh;fs;. kwpj;jTld;

¶112

18

¶113

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶114

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶115

VNjh vjphpfs; nra;ag;Nghfpwhh;fs; vd;W ehd; igf;if rw;W

¶116

gpd;dhb epWj;jptpl;Nld;. clNd uh[; vd;w nry;tuh[; gf;fj;jpy; ,Ug;gth;fisg; ghh;j;J vd; mz;zid ifiaf;fhl;b nfl;l thh;ijahy; Ngrp ,tid ntl;bf;nfhs;Sq;flh vd;W $wpdhh;. clNd vd; mz;zid vjphpfs; #o;e;Jf;nfhz;ldh;. M[h; vjphpfsplk; vdJ ,uz;L gps;isfisahtJ ghUq;fs; vd;W $wpdhh;. mijnay;yhk; M[h; vjphpfs; Nfl;fNt ,y;iy. vjphp uh[h vdJ mz;zdpd; ,lJ gf;f fOj;jpy; Xq;fp ntl;bdhd;. vjphp RNu]; vd; mz;zdplk; jiyapy; eLGwj;jpYk;> gpd;Gwj;jpYk; ntl;bdhd;. vjphp Kj;Juh[; vd; mz;zdpd; ,lJ

¶117

fz; GUtk;> fPo;cjL jhilapYk; ntl;bdhd;. vjphp mUs;ngUkhs; vd;d md;zdpy; ,lJ khh;Gf;FNky; ntl;bdhd;. uhikad; kfd; uh[; vd; mz;zdpd; tyJgf;f G[j;jpYk;> tyJ

¶118

gf;fk; kzpfl;bYk; ntl;bdhh;. vjphp KUfd; vd; mz;zdpd; KJfpy; ntl;bdhh;. vjphp gpuG vdJ mz;zdpd; ,lJ gf;fk; fhypd; Kl;bw;F fPo; ntl;bdhh;. vjphp itj;jpypq;fk; vd; mz;zdpd; ,lJ gf;fk; fhy; fuz;ilf;F gpd;dhy; ntl;bdhh;. vdJ mz;zd; JbJbj;J rhtij vd; fz;zhy; ghh;j;Njd;. vjphpfis gpbg;gjw;fhf ntl;lhNj vd;W nrhy;ypf;nfhz;L mUfpy; nrd;Nwd;. gf;fj;jpy te;jhy; cdf;Fk; ,Nj fjp jhd; ; vd;W $wpdhh;fs;. clNd ntl;Ltijg;ghh;j;jTld; gaj;jpy; mq;NfNa epd;Wtpl;Nld;. M[h; vjphpfs; rj;jk;Nghl;Lf;nfhz;Nl RNu;> uh[h> Kj;Juh[; MfpNahh; bvd; 76 vk;.3135 vd;w rpfg;G

¶119

epw Adpf;fhd; ,Urf;fu thfdj;jpy; Kd;dhb nrd;whh;fs;. ,uz;lhtJ uhikah kfd; uh[;> mUs;ngUkhs;>

¶120

19

¶121

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶122

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶123

KUfd; MfpNahh; bvd;.72 Nf 7929 vd;w g[h[; ghf;rh; tz;bapy;

¶124

Vwp Nghdhh;fs;. vjphp gpuG itj;jpypq;fk; bvd; 67 , 2415 vd;w

¶125

vk`h 130 ,Urf;fu thfdj;jpy; nrd;whh;fs;. ehd; mq;NfNa ,Ue;Njd; ”

¶126

P.W.2 also in his evidence has clearly stated about the specific

¶127

overt act as against the appellants. For better appreciation the evidence of P.W.2 is extracted hereunder:

¶128

“ ,we;JNghd fUg;grhkp jhkiur;nry;tk; igf;fpYk;> ehd;

¶129

Kj;Jf;Fkhh; igf;fpYk; Vwp Myq;Fsk; nrd;Nwhk;. Myq;Fsk; -

¶130

GJg;gl;b nry;Yk; Nuhl;by; ,e;J ehlhh; rKjhaj;jpw;F ghj;jpag;gl;l ,Wjp ahj;jpiu rttz;b epw;Fk; ,lj;jpw;F rw;W njd;Gwj;jpy; mhpthSld; epd;W nfhz;bUe;j uh[; vd;w nry;tuh[;> uh[h> Kj;Juh[;> itj;jpypq;fk;> gpuG> vdf;F Kd;dhy; nrd;W

¶131

nfhz;bUe;j fUg;grhkp igf;if Nghftplhky; kwpj;jhh;fs;.

¶132

kwpj;jTld; uh[; vd;w nry;tuh[; $l ,Ue;j

¶133

vjphpfisg;ghh;j;J ,tid ntl;bf;nfhs;Sq;fslh vd;W nrhy;yTk;> uh[h itj;jpUe;j mhpthshy; fUg;grhkpapd; ,lJ gf;f fOj;jpy;

¶134

ntl;bdhh;. RNu; itj;jpUe;j mhpthshy; eL kz;ilapYk;> gpd;de;jiyapYk; ntl;bdhh;. Kj;Juh[; itj;jpUe;j mhpthshy;

¶135

fUg;grhkpapd; fPo; cjl;bYk;> fz; GUgj;jpYk; ntl;bdhh;. mUs; ngUkhs; itj;jpUe;j mhpthshy; ,lJ gf;fk; khh;gpy; khwp khwp ntl;bdhh;. KUfd; itj;jpUe;j mhpthshy; fUg;grhkpapd; KJfpy;

¶136

20

¶137

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶138

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶139

ntl;bdhh;. uh[; itj;jpUe;j mhpthshy; fUg;grhkp tyJ G[j;jpYk;> tyJ if kzp fl;bYk; ntl;bdhh;. gpuG itj;jpUe;j mhpthshy; fUg;grhkp ,lJ fhy; %l;by; ntl;bdhh;. itj;jpypq;fk; itj;jpUe;j mhpthshy; fUg;grhkpapd; ,lJ fhy; fuz;ilf;F fPo; ntl;bdhh;. gpd;G fUg;grhkp fPNo tpOe;J mNj ,lj;jpy; ,we;Jtpl;lhh;. mUfpy; ,Ue;j nkh;Fhp ntspr;rj;jpy; njspthf ghh;j;Njhk;. gpd;G ehDk;> Kj;Jf;FkhUk; mUfpy; nrd;Nwhk;> fpl;Nl te;jhy; ntl;btpLNthk; vd;W nrhd;dhh; mjdhy; ehq;fs; fpl;Nl nry;ytpy;iy. RNu; uh[h> Kj;Juh[; MfpNahh; bvd; 76 vk;.3135 vd;w Adpf;fhd; igf;fpYk; mUz;ngUkhs;> uh[;> KUfd; 3NgUk; bvd;.72 Nf 7921 fhthrfp igf;fpYk; gpuG kw;Wk; itj;jpypq;fKk; bvd; 67 , 2415 vd;w akfh igf;fpYk; Vwp njw;F Nehf;fp nrd;Wtpl;lhh;. uh[; vd;w nry;tuh[; Fsj;jpw;Fs; ,wq;fp fpof;F Nehf;fp nrd;Wtpl;lhh;. rk;gtk; ele;jgpwF ehq;fs; mOJf;nfhz;bUe;Njhk;. ”

¶140

Therefore from the evidences of P.W.1 and P.W.2 it is clear that P.W.1 and P.W.2 are the eye witnesses and P.W.3 is the wife of the deceased and she has also clearly stated about the motive and also stated that she heard about the death of her husband.

¶141

P.W.4 is the independent witness and he has spoken about the conduct of all the appellants soon before the occurrence. For better

¶142

21

¶143

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶144

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶145

appreciation the evidence of P.W.4 is extracted here under :

¶146

“ ,uT 8.00 kzpf;F rptyhh;Fsj;jpy; ,Ue;J Gjg;gl;bf;F

¶147

nrd;Nwd;. ehd; Ntiyf;F Ml;fis nrhy;yptpl;L cuk; thq;Ftjw;fhf Myq;Fsj;ij Nehf;fp te;J nfhz;bUe;Njd;. mg;nghOJ md;W ,uT

¶148

8.30 kzp ,Uf;Fk;. mq;F uh[; vd;w nry;tuh[;> Rnu; kw;Wk; rpyh; mhpthSld; ,;e;J ehlhh; rKjhaj;jpw;F ghj;jpag;gl; 4 rf;fu tz;b epw;Fk; ,lj;jpw;F njd;Gwk; iyl; ntspr;rj;jpy; mhpthSld; epd;W nfhz;bUe;jhh;fs;. mijg;ghh;j;jTld; mth;fs; vjw;F epw;fpwhh;fs; vd;W gae;J Ngha; ehd; Myq;Fsk; nrd;W tpl;Nld;. ehd; Myq;Fsj;jpy; cs;s Nuhl;L Nky; cs;s B filapy; B Fbj;J;f;nfhz;bUe;Njd;. ehd; B Fbj;J nfhz;bUe;j NghJ jhkiur;nry;tDk;> fUg;grhkpAk; njw;F Nehf;fp xU igf;fpy; nrd;whh;fs. mjw;F gpd;dhb Kj;Jf;FkhUk;> Rg;GuhIPk; kw;nwhU igf;fpy; nrd;whh;fs. ehd; B filapy; Ngrpf; nfhz;bUe;Njd; fhy; kzp Neuj;jpw;F gpwF rptyhh;Fsj;ij Nrh;e;j fUg;grhkpia ntl;bf;nfhiy nra;jjhf $wpdhh;fs; ”

¶149

Therefore from the evidence of P.W.4 the presence of P.W.1

¶150

and 2 in the occurrence place is established. P.W.5 is the sister of the

¶151

deceased and she has also stated about the motive between the appellants and the deceased and she has also spoken about the occurrence who is a hearsay evidence. Therefore from the evidences of

¶152

22

¶153

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶154

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶155

P.Ws.1 to 5 motive is also established and from the evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.3 occurrence is also established and from the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 specific overt act as against all the appellants have been established.

¶156

P.W.6 is also an independent witness and he has also spoken about the motive behind the murder and also he is an hearsay evidence for the occurrence. P.W. 7 is also an hearsay evidence. P.W.8 is the witness to the observation mahazhar.

¶157

P.W.12 is the Village Administrative Officer who has spoken about the arrest, confession and also recovery. Though the confession made before the police is not admissible evidence under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, however portion of the confession statement leading to recovery is admissible in evidence. Therefore from the reading of evidence of P.W.1 and 2 prosecution has proved recovery. P.W.12 also identified the weapon before the Court during trial. Though P.W.13 Village Assistant turned hostile, he admitted his signature found

¶158

in the recovery mahazhar. Since one of the witnesses to the recovery

¶159

23

¶160

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶161

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶162

mahazhar turned hostile that will not affect the case of the prosecution. Therefore, a combined reading of evidence of P.W.12 and P.W.13 it is clear that the appellants have made confession voluntarily and based on the confession recovery was also effected. Subsequently, the said recovered materials were identified in the court and the admitted portion of the confession statement of A1 is marked as Ex.P.35 and also the recovered materials were exhibited.

¶163

Further the doctor who conducted post mortem on the body of the deceased was examined as P.W.18 who has clearly stated about the ante mortem injuries sustained by the deceased and gave opinion about the cause of death. The doctor during the post mortem had noted down the following injuries:

¶164

“1. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 10x1cmxbone deep over top of head 10cm above left ear, 16cm above right ear.

¶165

2. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 9x1cmxskull bone deep over left temporal and left side of occipital region, 9 cm below injury no.1 and 1 cm above left ear

¶166

3. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 13x1x2.5 cm seen over left side of face. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels,nerves and bones. It lies 3cm outer to left angle of mouth and 2.5 cm inner to

¶167

24

¶168

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶169

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶170

left ear.

¶171

4. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 14x1x6cm seen

¶172

over left side of face. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and bones. It lies 1cm outer to injury no.3.

¶173

5 An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 18x1x5cm seen

¶174

over left side of face. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and bones. It lies 1cm outer to injury no.4.

¶175

6. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 18x1x5cm seen

¶176

over left side of face. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and bones and left ear. It lies 1cm below and outer to injury no.5.

¶177

7. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 12x1x4cm seen

¶178

over left side of jaw. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and bones. It lies 1cm below to injury no.6

¶179

8. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 10x1x4cm seen

¶180

over left side of jaw and left ear. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and bones. It lies 2cm below and outer to injury no.7

¶181

9. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 2x1x2cm seen

¶182

over left side of upper lip

¶183

10. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 4x1x1cm seen over left cheek. It lies 0.5cm outer to injury no.9

¶184

11. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 10x3x4cm over front of upper part of neck. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves, wind pipe food pipe and C4 cervical vertebra. It lies 8cm below chin

¶185

12. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 20x3cmx bone deep seen over left side of back of neck. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and C5 cervical vertebra.

¶186

25

¶187

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶188

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶189

13. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 8x3x3cm seen over lower part of front of neck. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves, windpipe and food pipe. It lies 2 cm below injury no.11

¶190

14. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 2x1x1cm seen over lower part of left side of neck. It lies 1cm below injury no.13.

¶191

15. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 3x1x4cm seen over lower part of left side of neck. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels and nerves 1cm below injury no.14.

¶192

16. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 6x1x4cm seen over lower part of left side of neck. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and windpipe 1cm below injury no. 15.

¶193

17. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 12x2x5cm seen over left side of back of neck. It lies 1cm below injury No.12.

¶194

18. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 8x1x2cm seen over left side of occipital region. It lies 2 cm outer to left mastoid.

¶195

19. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 10x6x2cm seen over top of left shoulder.

¶196

20. A vertical gapping cut injury of size 3x1x1cm seen over front of left chest. 3 cm in length with trial mark in downward direction

¶197

21. A vertical gapping heavy cut injury of size 14x2x2cm seen over front of inner lower aspect of left arm, elbow and inner upper aspect of left forearm

¶198

22 .A vertical gapping heavy cut injury of size 5x2x2cm seen over lower aspect of outer part of left arm. It lies 1cm outer to injury No.21.

¶199

26

¶200

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶201

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶202

23. A vertical gapping cut injury of size 9x2x1cm seen over back of inner, lower aspect of left arm. It lies 1cm outer to injury no.21.

¶203

24. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 6x2x2cm seen over lower part of back of left arm. It lies 5 cm below to injury no.23.

¶204

25. A vertical gapping cut injury of size 25x1x2cm seen over lower part of back of left arm elbow and back of left forearm. It lies 4 cm outer to injury No.24.

¶205

26. A vertical gapping heavy cut injury of size 24x1x3cm seen over lower part of back of left arm elbow and back of left forearm. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and bones. It lies 1cm outer to injury no.25.

¶206

27. A vertical gapping heavy cut injury of size 25x1x2cm seen over lower part of back of left arm elbow and back of forearm. It lies 3 cm outer to injury No.26.

¶207

28. A vertical gapping heavy cut injury of size 11x3x4cm seen over back of left elbow. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and bones. It lies 2cm outer to injury no.27.

¶208

29. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 8x3x2cm seen over inner and lower part of back of left forearm. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and bones. It lies 2 cm below to injury No.27.

¶209

30. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 8x2x3cm seen over inner aspect of left palm. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and tendons. It lies 4cm below to injury no.29

¶210

31. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 12x2cmxplaural cavity deep seen over front and outer aspect of left

¶211

27

¶212

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶213

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶214

side of chest. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves, ribs 7 to 9 and pleura.

¶215

32. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 10x2cm x plaural cavity deep seen over front and outer aspect of left side of chest. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves ribs 8 and 9 with surrounding soft tissues contusion, pleura and lower lobe of left lung. It lies 2 cm below to injury no.31.

¶216

33. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 6x 2cmxplaural cavity deep seen over outer aspect of left side of chest. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves, ribs 8 and 9 pleura and lower lobe of left lung. It lies 3 cm below and outer to injury no.31.

¶217

34. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 16x2cmx plaural and peritoneal cavity deep seen over back of left side of chest and abdomen. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves, ribs 9 to 11 pleura diaphragm and spleen. It lies 2 cm below to injury no.33

¶218

35. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 11 x 1cm x peritoneal cavity deep seen over back of left side of abdomen. It cuts underlying muscles, vessels, nerves and ribs 10 and 11. It lies 1cm below to injury no.34.

¶219

36. An oblique gapping cut injury of size 9x1x1cm seen over outer and back of left side of abdomen. It cuts underlying soft tissues. It lies 1cm below to injury no.35.

¶220

37. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 3x1x2cm seen over left side of abdomen. It cuts underlying soft tissues. It lies 3cm below to injury no.32.

¶221

38. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 12x8cm x hip

¶222

28

¶223

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶224

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶225

bone deep seen over left hip. It lies 8cm below to injury no.37

¶226

39. A horizontal gapping heavy cut injury of size 6x1x2cm seen over midline of lower back. It cuts underlying soft tissues left hip bone. It lies 11cm above to sacral promontory.

¶227

40. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 7x2x3cm seen over front of left knee. It cuts underlying soft tissues muscles, vessels, nerves and bones.

¶228

41. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 10x2x4cm seen over back of middle of left leg. It cuts underlying soft tissues, muscles, vessels,nerves and bones. It lies 20cm above the left ankle.

¶229

42. An oblique gapping cut injury of size 3x0.5x0.5cm seen over outer aspect of right lower lip.

¶230

43. An oblique gapping cut injury of size 3x1x1cm seen over back of right side of neck. It lies 9cm below the right mastoid.

¶231

44. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 7x1x2cm seen over back of right side of neck. It cuts underlying soft tissues, mussels, vessels, nerves. It lies 1cm below the injury no.43

¶232

45 An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 5x1x2cm seen over back of right side of neck. It lies 1cm below the injury no.44.

¶233

46. An oblique gapping cut injury of size 4x2x1cm seen over front of right shoulder. It lies 1 cm below the right acromian process.

¶234

47. An oblique gapping heavy cut injury of size 4x2x3cm seen over dorsum of right wrist. It cuts underlying soft tissues, muscles, vessels, nerves and bones. It lies 7cm below right wrist joint.

¶235

29

¶236

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶237

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶238

The scientific Officer was examined as P.W.15 and biological report was marked as Ex.P.21 and also the materials collected from the body was sent for expert opinion. Ex.P.37/ chemical report shows that the materials collected and recovered were sent for c hemical analysis and Ex.P.41 is the serology report, where human blood was detected from the material objects, thereby the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and also proved motive that the appellants have committed the charged offence.

¶239

The learned counsel appearing for the appellants pointed out certain defects and lapses in the investigation regarding registering the First Information Report and sending the complaint to the Court and also recovery and also sending the body to the hospital.

¶240

It is settled proposition of law that mere defects in the investigation and lapses on the part of the investigation agency will not affect the case of prosecution when there is eyewitness and overt act as against all the appellants and which is also substantiated through 30

¶241

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶242

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶243

recovery and also through medical evidence. Therefore, mere lapses and defects is not fatal to the case of prosecution. However the learned counsel appearing for the appellants have raised grounds regarding the presence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 and their conduct and P.W.1 and P.W.2 in their evidence have clearly stated about the motive and also stated about the specific overt acts, therefore, the presence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 cannot be doubted.

¶244

The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that witnesses did not take any attempt to save the life of the deceased, therefore the presence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 are highly doubtful. According to the prosecution, P.W.1 and P.W.2 tried to save the lives but at that time all the appellants were showing deadly weapons and threatened them. It is a case of brutal murder and seven persons gathered together unlawfully along with deadly weapons and started attacking the deceased. Therefore, the persons who are seeing the occurrence naturally would get fear in their minds. Further there are four persons on the side of the deceased and there are seven persons on the side of the appellants and also unexpectedly all of a sudden they

¶245

31

¶246

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶247

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶248

gathered with deadly weapons and attacked. Therefore, the contention raised by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants are not at all acceptable and also in the case on hand the evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.6 have clearly spoken about the motive. P.W.1 and P.W.2 have spoken about the occurrence and specific overt acts. P.W.2 to P.W.6 corroborated the evidence of P.W.1 regarding motive. P.W.1 to P.W.3 have clearly spoken about the commission of offence made by the appellants and this Court on careful perusal of entire oral and documentary evidence and also the scientific evidence found that the trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence and recorded conviction .

¶249

This Court while independently re-appreciating the evidence found that the evidence of P.W.1 to 6 are cogent, reliable and also credible and therefore this Court inspires confidence and there is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.3 and this Court finds no merit in these appeals and the same are liable to be dismissed.

¶250

32

¶251

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶252

Crl.A(MD)Nos.527,528,530,531,532 and 711 of 2022

¶253