LexBASKAR @ KANNAN versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] i S.C.R. 400 A BASi<AR @ KANNAN • v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU (Criminal Appeal No. 1249 of 2006) JANUARY 20, 2009 B [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ.] .. PENAL CODE, 1860: c Sections 302, 304 Part II - Murder - Appellant-accused convicted under s.302 by Trial Court while convicting other accused under s.304 Part II - Upheld by High Court - On appeal, Held: Trial Court and High Court rightly found the D appellant guilty relying on the evidence of witnesses related to the deceased - Reasoning given therefore does not suffer from any infirmity. Appellant-accused was convicted u/s 302 IPC and the other accused uls 304 Part II IPC by the Trial Court. E The conviction of the appellant was upheld by the High Court. Hence the appeal. Dismissing the appeal, the Court .. F HELD: 1. It is to be noted that PW-1 was not only an eye witness but also an injured witness. Merely because PWs 1 to 4 were related to the deceased that cannot be a ground to cast a doubt on the authenticity of their evidence. What was required was the closer scrutiny of the evidence. PW-1 has narrated the entire incident in G Ext.P-1 which was lodged immediately while he was admitted in the Government Hospital for treatment. In the Ext.P-1 PW-1 has categorically stated about the presence of A-1 to A-7. He had also stated that A-1, A-2, A-3 A-4, A- 5, and A-6, the present appellant were armed with aruvals. H 400 BASKAR@ KANNAN v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU 401 ~ He had also given a detailed description of the overt acts A attributable to each one of them, and as to how they - attacked the deceased. His evidence in Court is to similar effect. The evidence of PWs 2 to 4 is also in similar lines. [Para 5] [405-F-H] B 2. The High Court noted that after there was a quarrel A-1 went to his village and brought all the accused persons with him. On the facts of the case the High Court noted that there was absence of common object. What was to be expected was an assault. Accordingly, it was c held that A-2 to A-7 were guilty of offence punishable under Section 304 Part II, IPC. The Trial Court and the High Court have rightly found the appellant guilty. The reasoning given by the High Court to find the appellant guilty does not suffer from any infirmity. [Para 6] [406-A- D -+ BJ CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 1249 of 2006. From the Judgment and Order dated 21.7.2006 of the High E Court of Madras, Bench at Madurai ir: Crl. Appeal No. 1473 of 2003. >r A.T.M. Rangaramanujam, P.N. Ramalingam, Pugazhenlhi and Balamurugan, for the Appellant. F R. Sundaravaradhan, S. Thananjayan and R. Nedumaran, for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to G -I the judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court upholding the conviction bf the appellant for offence punishable under Section 304 Part If oLtt.i.e. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC'). The ·accused persons are described as A-1, A-2 etc. as described by the Trial Court. A-1 by the impugned H 402 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 1 S.C.R. A judgment of the High Court was held guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, while A-2 to A-7 including the present appellant were found guilty under Section 304 Part II, IPC and each was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years. A-3 to A-7 were found guilty of offence under Section B 324 IPC and each was sentenced to under RI for two years. A-1 to A-7 were acquitted of the other charges leveled against them. A-9 and A-10 were acquitted of the charges levelled against them. Fifteen persons faced trial, out of whom the trial Court acquitted A-8, A-11 to A-15. By the impugned judgment, c as noted above, the High Court directed acquittal of A-9 and A-10. 2. The prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows: D PW-1 is the native of Thugli Periyar Nagar. PWs 2, 3, 4 5 and 6 all belonged to the same place. PWs 2, 3 and 4 were originally employed in Ambika Sugar Mills, Kottur. P.Ws. 6 and 7 are also the residents of the said place and all were carrying on agricultural operations. P .W.8 belonged to kealathur village, E where he was serving as village menial. P.W.9 belonged to Keezhasuriya Moolai village, where he was serving as village assistant community. A-1 to A-11 and A-13 to A-15 belong to Hindu Padayachi out of whom, A-1 and A-2,
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.