Thamizharasan vs State

Singaravelu, J.—The Appellant Thamizharasan has been convicted of by the learned Sessions Judge, Salem, for an offence punishable u/s

302, Indian Panel Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life, for having caused the death of his wife on 12th July, 1981, at 7 p.m. at

the Thandavarapuram Power House quarters at Attur by inflicting number of stabs with a bichuva knife as a result of which she died on the spot.

Deceased Kalai Selvi was the third of the five daughters of her parents. Her father was a Line Inspector in the Electricity Board Power House at

Thandavarapuram, Attur. The said girl was married to the accused about six years prior to the occurrence. The accused was a waster and an idler

and he was a rolling stone. He never stuck on to any job and he was just roaming about without any ostensible means of livelihood. Consequently,

the marital life of deceased Kalai Selvi was unhappy and the accused never attended to her needs or kept her happy. The father-in-law of the

accused who was a Line Inspector in the Electricity Board even obtained a casual labourer''s work for his son-in-law, but the latter was indifferent

and left the job. In these circumstances the parents brought the girl to their house about ten days prior to the occurrence. The deceased was aged

about 21 and the accused was aged about 23 on the date of the occurrence in July 1981. When the deceased girl was brought to her parent''s

house for a change, the accused was worrying his parents-in-law to send her back at once and he was making a row with his parents-in-law by

coming to their house and demanding the sending away of the girl back to his house.

On the eve of the occurrence, on 11th July, 1981, P.W. 1, the mother of the deceased girl, took her and her last daughter to a morning movie

show at Attur and was returning house at 2 p.m., While they were waiting at the Attur bus stand, the accused accosted them and told his wife,

catching hold of her hand and dragging her . P.W. 1, the mother-in-law told the accused politely. .

The accused retorted that he would come to their house the next day and if the wife was not sent to him she would de stabbed and murdered.

On 12th July, 1981, which was Sunday, the accused promptly came to the house of his parents-in-law, in the power house residential quarters.

On seeing his mood, the mother, the deceased girl and the last daughter Jeeva who were chatting outside the house in the varandah, went inside the

house and bolted the door. The accused went to the window and asked them to open the door as otherwise he would smash the front door. On

hearing his shouting and seeing the aggressive mood of her husband, Kalai Selvi opened the back door of the house and ran out. The accused

chased her and caught hold of her within a few feet and massacred her by inflicting 27 stabs on vital parts all over body with a bichuva resulting in

her instantaneous death. The victim was shouting for help and though her mother and the neighbors were witnessing the occurrence, they could not

go near since the accused flourished the knife and threatened them.

(Discussion of facts omitted)

According to the doctor, the deceased would appear to have died of shock and hemorrhage due to multiple injuries involving the vital organs,

about 17 to 20 hours prior to the post mortem examination. He has further stated that the above mentioned injuries could have been caused by

stabbing with a knife like M.O. 12, Ex. P. 3 is the post mortem certificate.

The accused was arrested on 13th July 1981, and when he was questioned, he gave a confession statement, the admissible portion of which is

Ex. P. 8, leading to the recovery of blood-stained clothes M. Os. 9 to 11 and also the knife M. Os. 12. The Inspector, P.W. 13, found some

injuries on his person and, therefore, sent him to the Government hospital, Attur, for treatment.

P.W. 7, the Civil Assistant Surgeon attached to the Government Hospital, Attur, examined the accused on 13th July 1981, at 11.35 a.m. and

found on him the following injuries.

[The discussion of facts is omitted-Ed.]

According to the doctor, injuries Nos. 1 to 3 are grievous in nature and injuries Nos. 4 to 7 are simple in nature. Ex. P. 5 is the wound certificate.

The material objects were sent for chemical examination and Ex. P. 14 and P. 15 are respectively the report of the Chemical Examiner and the

Serologist. After completing the investigation, the Inspector laid the charge sheet against the accused.

In the trial Court, when questioned u/s 313, Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused stated that he had no quarrel with his wife and that his

wife was frequently visiting her parents. He then stated that on the date of occurrence, when he went to the house of his parents-in-law, he saw his

co-brother Varadaraj sitting in the same cot with the deceased Kalai Selvi. He then stated that he wanted to take his wife and that he was allowed

to take her. According to him, he was taking her along with his co-brother Varadaraj and that Varadaraj suddenly attacked him and when the

accused warded it off, he sustained injuries. He then put forward a case that when Varadaraj again attempted to attack him, he put his wife as a

shield and in that process the wife had died. He had no witness to be examined on his side. The learned Sessions Judge found the accused guilty

and sentenced him to imprisonment for life.

Four witnesses have given direct evidence regarding the assault on the deceased and they are P.Ws. 1 to 4. P.W. 1 is the mother-in-law of the

accused and she has given a complete picture of the marital life between the accused and the deceased and has also stated that since her daughter

Kalai Selvi was very unhappy, her husband drove her to their house about 10 to 12 days prior to the occurrence.

[Discussion of facts is omitted-Ed.]

The evidence of P.W. 1, the mother, is most natural and acceptable and also trustworthy. It was she who set the law in motion by laying the

F.I.R., Ex. P. 1 at the police station at 8:30 p.m. i.e., within about 1-1/2 hours after the occurrence. There was no avoidable delay in laying the

complaint. This F.I.R is an encyclopedia containing wealth of details regarding the assault and also the circumstances leading to the assault.

Her evidence is further corroborated by the other evidence furnished by P.Ws. 2 to 4.

The medical evidence furnished by P.W. 7 further corroborates the evidence of the eye witnesses. The doctor found 27 incised injuries and

cuttings on the person of deceased Kalai Selvi and most of them are on the chest of the deceased cutting the ribs and the muscles and all the

internal organs. The injuries speak for themselves, and the lungs and liver, etc, have been pierced. According to the doctor, the cumulative effect of

all the injuries has resulted in severe hemorrhage and instantaneous death. He also has stated that these injuries could have been caused due to

stabbing with the knife M.O. 12.

The motive for the occurrence is that the parents-in-law of the accused had taken their daughter for a change and kept her in their house for

about ten days.

X X X

The learned trial Judge was perfectly justified in convicting the accused u/s 320, Indian Panel Code.

With reference to the punishment for the offence, the learned Sessions Judge has chosen to sentence the accused to imprisonment for life,

though he has clearly found that this murder has been committed by the husband brutally, deliberately and most cruelty. The learned trial Judge

having found that the murder of his wife is heinous and cold blooded, is not consistent in awarding the lesser punishment of imprisonment for life. In

this connection we are constrained to make some observations with reference to the awarding of punishment u/s 302, Indian Panel Code of late, it

is noticed that there is some discernible tendency on the part of the trial Judges to prefer to impose the lesser penalty prescribed for the offence u/s

302, Indian Panel Code, even in grave cases, presumably on a wrong interpretation and misconception of the judgment of the Supreme Court,

rendered in Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab, . of course, the Supreme Court has held that the extreme penalty of death may be imposed only in

the rarest of rare cases, but, that does not mean that death sentence should not be imposed u/s 302, Indian Panel Code, under any circumstances.

Many a trial Judge prefer to err on the safer side by imposing a lesser punishment of imprisonment for life even in extreme sasses. In this

connection, it will. be useful to remember the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in Machhi Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab, wherein

the guidelines for imposing death sentence have been clearly laid down. Their Lordships have observed that the extreme penalty of death need not

be inflicted except in grave cases of extreme culpability and that life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an exception. But, the Supreme

Court has at the same time held that if there are aggravating circumstances, which outweigh the mitigating circumstances, there is no other

alternative but to impose the death sentence. In fact, the decision reported in Munawar Harun Shah v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1983 S.C. 957,

says that due regard must be had to the magnified, gruesome nature of the offence and the manner in which it was perpetrated. Their Lordships

would observe thus:

Any leniency shown in the matter of sentence would not only be misplaced but will certainly give rise to and foster a feeling of private revenge

among the people leading to destablisation of the society.

Even in the Full Bench decision of the Supreme Court in Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab, it was held that the provision of death penalty as

an alternative punishment for murder u/s 302 , Indian Panel Code is not unreasonable and it is in public interest.

Applying these guidelines, to the facts and circumstances of our case, it is clear to us as found by the trial court that the murder of the wife aged

21 years by the husband ostensibly for no rhyme or reason is most cruel and brutal as is revealed by the 27 stabs all over her body with a bichuva

resulting in her instantaneous death. There was absolutely no provocation for the husband to commit this dastardly act and his only grievance was

that his wife had overstayed in her father''s house for about ten days. Therefore, there are no extenuating or mitigating circumstances in favour of

the accused in this case and the extreme penalty of death would have been a condign punishment for this crime on a young defenseless woman.

However, the State itself has not taken steps to file an appeal for enhancement of punishment, and therefore, we leave it there making this

observation that adequate punishment commensurate with the crime must be normally awarded on the facts of each case and this is the age-long

and time honored practice which the courts have followed down the ages. With these observations, the conviction and the sentence are confirmed

and the appeal is dismissed.