Paramasivam and another vs State

M. Karpagavinayagam, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment in Sessions Case No. 78 of 1989 on the file of the learned Second

Additional Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli, convicting the first appellant (A-1) for an offence under S. 304 Part I, IPC and sentencing him to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and convicting the second appellant (A-2) for an offence u/s 201, IPC and sentencing him to undergo

rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one more month. Originally, A-

1 was tried for an offence u/s 302, IPC, while A-2 was tried for an offence u/s 302 read with Sec. 34 IPC, but, after trial, they were convicted

only for lesser offences as stated above.

The facts of the case are as follows :

On the side of the prosecution P.Ws. 1 to 13 were examined, Exs, P-1 to P-25 were filed and M.Os. 1 to 55 were marked. P.W. 1, Mani, is a

resident of Sekar Nagar in Pallapatti village. He knows a black magician by name Thirugnanam, the deceased in this case, for six months or so.

P.W. 1 knows the appellants also P.W. 1 was suffering from stomach ache and so he obtained medicine from deceased Thirugnanam. Four or five

days prior to occurrence, when P.W. 1 after finishing his cooking work, returned home, he found that deceased Thirugnanam was sitting in the

entrance of the house of P.W. 1. The deceased requested P.W. 1 to give him permission to stay there for one day. Though P.W. 1 was not

inclined to give such permission, he allowed deceased Thirugnanam to take his bed on that night alone in the pial of his house. On the next morning

A-1 and A-2 came to the house of P.W. 1 and took deceased Thirugnanam with them, stating that they would go to Anna Nagar.

P.W. 2, Mohideen Batcha, is also a resident of Pallapatti. He was running a tea shop. He also used to go to other Villages for selling umbrellas

and mats. He knows the deceased. Previously, P.W. 222 had taken deceased Thirugnanam for treating patients at karungalpatti Village. P.W. 2

knows about the stay of deceased Thirugnanam in the house of A-2. In fact, deceased Thirugnanam informed P.W. 22, in the presence of A-1,

that he was going to the house of A-2.

P.W. 3, Jawahar, is working as a teacher and is a resident of Anna Nagar. His house is situate near the house of A-2. He also knows both the

accused and the deceased. P.W. 3 came to know that deceased Thirugnanam was brought to A-2''s house, in order to perform some pooja for

curing the disease of A-2, since A-2 was suffering from some illness. On 30-5-1987, P.W. 3 saw A-1, A-2 and deceased Thirugnanam moving

inside the compound of the house of A-2.

P.W. 4 Nachimuthu, is a President of Anna Nagar, Pallapatti. His house is situate about 125 feet from the house of A-2 P.W. 4 also knows that

the accused proposed to perform pooja with the help of the deceased. P.W. 4 also saw the deceased in the company of the accused inside the

house of A-2.

P.W. 5 Mohamed Sheriff, is running a beed a shop at the bus stand. On 2-6-1987 evening. A-1 came to his shop and demanded Rs. 5/-. At

that time, A-1 informed P.W. 5 that he was working under deceased Thirugnanam. A-1 was also working for sometime in the shop of P.W. 5.

But, from 3-6-1987, A-1 did not come to the shop of P.W. 5.

On the evening of 3-6-1987, P.W. 3 came from his school and on the way, in the house of A-2, he found that the deceased was cut and the

head and the trunk were lying separately. P.W. 4 also came after finishing his work. He also saw the same thing inside the house of A-2. P.Ws. 1

and 2 also saw the dead body of the deceased in the house of A-2. On 3-6-87 at 10.30 a.m., A-2 came to the Village Administrative Officer,

Narayanan, P.W. 6 and gave a complaint, which was reduced into writing. The same was read over to A-2 and his signature was obtained. Ex. P.

3 is the complaint so recorded. Thereafter P.W. 6 reached the scene of occurrence and inspected the place. He prepared a report. Ex. P. 4 and

despatched Exs. P-3 and P-4 to the police station through the Talayari.

On 3-6-1987 at 1.00 p.m., P.W. 11, Sambasivam, Sub-Inspector of Police, Aravakurichi received Exs. P-3 and P-4, sent by P.W. 6, and

registered a case in Crime No. 124 of 1987 u/s 302 IPC. Then he despatched Exs. P-3 and P-4 along with the printed F.I.R. Ex. P. 22, and to

Court and copies thereof to superior police officials. He also sent a message over the wireless it P.W. 13, Srinivasan, Inspector of Police Taluk

Police Station, Karur. On receipt of the said message, P.W. 13 arrived at Aravakurichi Police Station, received a copy of the F.I.R. at 2.30 p.m.

and reached the scene of occurrence. In the presence of P.W. 6, the Village Administrative Officer, P.W. 13 prepared an observation mahazar

Ex. P. 1, and a scene sketch, Ex. P. 24. He conducted inquest between 3.30 p.m. and 6.00 p.m. and examined A-2, P.W. 1, P.W. 2, P.W. 3,

P.W. 6 and Saroja Ex. P. 25 is the inquest report. P.W. 13 arranged through P.W. 7 Prakash, to take the photographs at the scene. M.O. 1

series and M.O. 55 series are the photographs and the corresponding negatives. At 6-15 p.m. P.W. 13, despatched the dead body to

Government Hospital, Pallapatti, through P.W. 9 Nallathambi, Police Constable, with a requisition, for conduct of post-mortem. At 6.30 p.m. he

recovered M.Os. 2 to 46 under mahazar Ex. P. 2 attested by P.W. 6.

On 4-6-1987 at 10.30 a.m. P.W. 12 Dr. Kannabai, commenced post-mortem on the corpse of deceased Thirugnanam. She found the

following injuries on the dead body :

An abrasion in the right fore-arm.

An abrasion in the right shoulder.

Head is severed from the body. The severed head is well fixed with severed body in anterior, posterior and lateral aspects when it is placed with

dead body. The injury is a cut lacerated injury in nature. The cut end of neck - The traphiguin, vertebral column at the level of C6, C7, and

membranes of spinal cord, spinal cord (cut at the level of C5, C6, C7) oesophagus up to 1/3 trachial 5, 6 just below hyoid bone, vertebral arteries

vein internal carotid arteries, both jugular veins (torn) facia of skin all are cut.

Body (cut end) - The traphiguin, vertebral column, membranes of the spinal cord, spinal cord, oesophagus, trachial rings 5, 6 vertebral artery, vein

internal carotid, arteries both, jugular veins, trachial facia, subcutaneous skin all are cut.

The proximal end of head and distal end of body, the above mentioned blood vessels, muscles (proximal end of head and distal end of neck well

fixes with each other. So, the severed head belongs to severed body of dead body.

Ex. P. 23 is the post-mortem certificate. The doctor in his certificate, Ex. P. 23, has opined that death would have occurred due to shock and

haemorrhage due to cut injury.

P.W. 13, on 22-6-1987, sent requisitions, Exs. P. 16 and P-18 along with M.Os. to the Magistrate to send the same for chemical analysis. As

per the requisitions, Exs. P-16 and P-18 the Court sent the MOs. and other things with requisitions. Exs. P.-17 and P-19 to the Laboratory. Ex.

P-20 is the report of the Analyst and Ex. P-21 is the report of the Serologist.

On 14-7-1987 at 3.00 p.m. P.W. 13 arrested A-1 and A-2 volunteered a confession, the admissible portion of which is Ex. P. 5, attested by

P.W. 6. In pursuance of Ex. P-5, A-1 took P.W. 13 and his party to a hut near Janakiammal thottam and produced M.Os. 47 to 52, which were

recovered under Ex. P. 6, mahazar, attested by P.W. 6 and another. Again A-1 took P.W. 13 and his party to the house of A-2. From there,

bloodstained earth, MO. 53, was recovered under Ex. P. 7 attested by P.W. 6 and another.

On 22-7-1987 at 4.00 p.m. P.W. 13 arrested A-2 and on his confession the admissible portion of which is Ex. P. 8, attested by P.W. 6 A-2

took P.W. 13 and his party to his house and produced M.O. 54 a framed copper plate with inscriptions, and the same was recovered under

mahazar, Ex. P. 9, attested by P.W. 6 and another. Thereafter, all the M.Os. were sent to Court.

On 29-7-1987 P.W. 13 sent a requisition, Ex. P. 10 to the Judicial Second Class Magistrate No. 1, Karur, for recording a confession from A.

On 11-8-1987 at 2.30 p.m. as per the order of the Magistrate, P.W. 8, A-1 was produced before him and after observing all the formalities

and giving sufficient time and necessary warnings as prescribed under law, P.W. 8 recorded the confession of A-1 on 12-8-1987, after satisfying

himself that A-1 wanted to give a voluntary confession. After recording was over, the same was read over to A-1, which was admitted to be

correct, and then his signature was obtained in Ex. P. 12, the confession statement.

On 29-7-1987, P.W. 13 sent another requisition Ex. P. 13, to the Magistrate, for recording a confession u/s 164, Cr.P.C. from A-2. In

pursuance of the requisition, A-2 was directed to be produced before the Magistrate, on 11-8-1987 at 2.00 p.m. After questioning, one day''s

time was given to A-2 to enable him to think it over again and to give a voluntary confession. Next day, i.e. on 11-8-1987, when A-2 was

produced the Magistrate put all questions in order to satisfy himself whether A-2 was willing to give a voluntary confession. After satisfying himself

that A-2 was willing to give a voluntary confession, P.W. 8 recorded the confession statement from A-2, which was read over and admitted to be

correct and thereafter A-2''s signature was obtained in the statement. Ex. P. 15 is the confession so recorded from A-2. After completing

investigation. P.W. 13 filed a charge-sheet against both the accused.

After the evidence of the prosecution was over, when the accused were questioned u/s 313, Cr.P.C. to explain the incriminating circumstances

appearing against them in evidence, they denied their complicity in the crime. They further added that deceased Thirugnanam was brought to the

house of A-2 in order to perform pooja for during the disease of A-2 and on 3-6-1987, when both the accused were inside the house along with

deceased Thirugnanam, they suddenly found the dead body of Thirugnanam, with his severed head and severed trunk and that they have no

connection, whatever, with the alleged offence.

On termination of trial, learned trial Judge on appraisal of the evidence, oral and documentary, found A-1 guilty u/s 304 Part I, I.P.C. and A-2

guilty u/s 201, I.P.C and dealt with them as stated earlier.

Miss G. Latha, learned Counsel for the appellants, took me through the evidence and contended that there were no eye-witnesses and that

there are also variations between the confession statements, Ex. P-12 and P. 13 and the evidence available in the case is feeble and as such, since

there are no sufficient materials to base the convictions, the accused are entitled for an acquittal.

Mr. Manimaran, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State, countered the submission made by the learned Counsel for the

appellants and contended that the convictions imposed on the appellants are correct and valid in law and the sentenced also were correctly

awarded.

During the course of arguments, learned Counsel for the appellants, though initially tried to argue on merits, ultimately confined herself to the

question of sentence, when this Court felt that the evidence adduced by the prosecution was sufficient to find the appellants/accused guilty for the

offences for which they were convicted.

P.W. 1 had seen the deceased being taken from his house by A-1 and A-2 to Anna Nagar, P.Ws. 2, 3 and 4 who are residing near the house

of A-2, had noticed, on the date of occurrence, the movements of both the accused as well as the deceased inside the compound of the house of

A-2, P.W. 5 was also informed by A-1 about the performances of Pooja and about the stay of deceased Thirugnanam in the house of A-2. The

occurrence took place on 2-6-1987. Next day, after the offence was committed, A-2 went to P.W. 6 the Village Administrative Officer and in

order to suppress the fact that A-1 and A-2 were involved in the crime, gave a complaint. After the arrest of A-1 and A-7 certain material objects

were recovered from two places, which would clinchingly connect the presence of the appellants/accused in the company of the deceased at the

relevant time inside the house of A-2. Besides this, Exs. P-12 and P-15 are the judicial confessions, which have been given on 12-8-1987 before

P.W. 8 the Magistrate, A-1 was arrested on 14-7-1987 and A-2 was arrested on 22-7-1987 and immediately thereafter, within 30 days, their

confessions were recorded by the Magistrate. A reading of the Judicial confessions, Exs. P-12 and P-15 coupled with the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to

5, would show that the first appellant alone had committed the offence and in order to save the first appellant, A-2 has given out a false statement

before P.W. 6, the Village Administrative Officer. All these materials have been elaborately discussed and considered by the trial Court and the

appellants have considered by the trial Court and the appellants have been correctly convicted for the offence u/s 304 Part I, I.P.C and u/s 201,

I.P.C. respectively.

In view of the foregoing analysis of the evidence, in addition to the reasons given by the trial Court, I am of the view that the convictions

imposed by the trial Court on the appellants are correct and the sentences of rigorous imprisonment for ten years and three years respectively

imposed on A-1 and A-2 have also been correctly awarded. In the light of the above circumstances, I do not propose to take a different view

from the view taken by the trial Court. The convictions and sentences imposed on the appellants are confirmed.

This appeal which has no merit, is liable to be dismissed and the same is accordingly dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.