C.Krishnamoorthy Vs State by — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Madras HC (2026)

C.Krishnamoorthy Vs State by — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Criminal appeal allowed; impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 19.10.2023 in S.C.No.386 of 2018 set aside; appellants/accused 1 and 2 acquitted of all charges; fine amount, if paid, to be refunded to the appellants; bail bonds, if executed, to stand cancelled.

Issue for consideration

Whether the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 19.10.2023 made in S.C.No.386 of 2018 by the learned XVI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, convicting the appellants under Section 302 r/w.34 IPC, is liable to be set aside. +1 more

Court's answer

This Criminal Appeal stands allowed and the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence made in S.C.No.386 of 2018 dated 19.10.2023 passed by the learned XVI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai is set aside.

Ratio / Principle

In the light of the contradictions, the prosecution has not proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt and the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Court below warrants interference.

Key takeaways

The appellants/accused 1 and 2 are acquitted of all the charges.ratio¶129
The complaint was scribed by the police and, although PWs.1 and 2 had no knowledge of the names of the accused till it was raised, the names of the accused were found in the complaint, which creates doubt over the prosecution case.ratio¶96
As per Exs.P15 (Accident Register) and P16 (Mortuary Label) the deceased was shown as an unknown person, the AR and treatment doctor were not examined, and the alleged occurrence place differs from the evidence of PW1 and PW2, which creates doubt about the prosecution case.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (P.Velmurugan and M.Jothiraman JJ.; judgment by M.Jothiraman, J.) allows Crl.A.No.93 of 2024 filed under Section 374(3) CrPC and acquits A1 C.Krishnamoorthy and A2 Raj of the murder of Kalaivanan, setting aside the judgment dated 19.10.2023 in S.C.No.386 of 2018 of the XVI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai whereby they were convicted under Section 302 r/w.34 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000/- (Crime No.1296 of 2017, P-5 MKB Nagar Police Station; occurrence of 03.09.2017). Holding that the prosecution had not proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt, the Court found: (i) the complaint was scribed by the police yet named the accused whose names PWs.1 and 2 admittedly did not know till it was raised; (ii) the Accident Register Ex.P15 and Mortuary Label Ex.P16 recorded the deceased as 'unknown', with occurrence time/place (Balaji Pawn Shop, 04.09.2017) at variance with the eyewitness version, and the AR and treatment doctors were not examined; (iii) CCTV footage from PW5's shop was neither produced nor its non-examination explained by PW14; (iv) recovery witnesses gave divergent versions; and (v) the Inquest Report Ex.P17, sent to court only on 03.05.2018, bore PW11's name prior to A2's arrest and contained an ante-time incident, making it an afterthought creating serious doubt. Fine, if paid, to be refunded; bail bonds cancelled.