In Re: Krishnaswami Alias Kittan

Horwill, J.—The appellant has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge of Coimbatore of the murder of his brother and has been -

sentenced to transportation for life.

Nobody actually saw the murder committed; but p.ws. 2 to 4 came on the scene upon hearing cries of ""Ayyo"" from the deceased and found that

he had a penetrating wound in the abdomen, through which the intestines were pro-trading. He said that the appellant had stabbed him. The

evidence shows that the appellant had been much taking to heart the tendency of has brother to commit petty thefts; and when taxed with the

offence after his brother had been stabbed, he admitted that he had committed it be cause he was ashamed of his brother''s conduct, The deceased

made a statement to those gathered there immediately after the offence and said that his brother had stabbed him. He repeated this statement when

he was formally examined at the hospital, where he said:

My elder brother came near me and stabbed me in my abdomen. He ran away after stabbing . . . Ha stabbed me like this because yesterday I

stole buttons from the houses of my elder brother, Kishnaswami�s brother-in-law, Sinnappan.

In the Courts below, the appellant denied all knowledge of the offence and attributed the evidence against him to enmity on the part of the

witnesses. There is no reason to think that there was any substance in these allegations; and the evidence seems to be beyond reproach.

The learned advocate for the appellant concedes that the evidence has made out a case of murder; but he contends that the appellant should be

dealt with u/s 10A, Borstal Schools Act, It is conceded that Section 8 would not apply; but it seems clear that u/s 10A of the Act, the Provincial

Government has power, in a case where an offender is on the age of the appellant, who is 17 years, and has been sentenced to transportation for

life, to send him to a Borstal School if they consider that he might with advantage be detained in such an institution. The appellant is psychologically

some-what abnormal and not a hardened criminal. It no action is taken u/s 10-A of the Act, it is difficult to think what suitable action can be taken

against the appellant. His crime does not merit a life sentence; and association with hardened criminals in an ordinary jail would cause his character

to deteriorate. On the other hand, he might under the sympathetic guidance of the Superintendent of a Borstal School, be helped to adapt himself

better to the problems of life.

While, therefore, confirming the sentence of transportation for life, I recommend to the Provincial Government that they take action u/s 10A and

commit the appellant to a Borstal School for such period as they think fit.

Mack J. - I should like to express complete agreement with my learned brother. We are not aware as to precisely what reasons guided the

learned Sessions Judge into finding that this was not a suitable case for Borstal treatment. It may be that he applied the principles of Section 8,

Borstal Schools Act, to this case, which should be dealt with u/s 10A. u/s 8 an adolescent offender should have criminal habits or tendencies or

association with persons of bad character. This is a peculiar case in which righteous indignation against his brother''s commission of petty thefts

developed a powerful emotion in this youth which he could not control and was the main motive for stabbing his brother and leading him into

committing a far graver crime.

In fact no better case for treatment in a Borstal institution can in my opinion be imagined.