G. VIVEKANANDAN versus SRIRAMULU & ORS.

Citation: [2009] 2 S.C.R. 351 · Decided: 12-02-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 2 S.C.R. 351 
G. VIVEKANANDAN 
A 
v. 
SRIRAMULU & ORS. 
Criminal Appeal No. 300 of 2003 
FEBRUARY 12. 2009 
B 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM 
SHARMA, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860 : 
s. 302134 - Conviction by trial court - Acquittal by High c 
Court - Held: The acquittal order, since was passed without 
analysis of evidence and without indicating basis for differing 
with conviction order, matter remitted to High Court for disposal 
afresh. 
Appellant accused was convicted u/s. 302/34 IPC. D 
~ 
)' 
The conviction order was reversed by High Court. Hence 
the present appeal. 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: High Court has practically disposed of the E 
criminal appeal without analyzing the evidence and 
without indicating any basis as to why the view expressed 
... 
" 
by the trial court cannot be maintained. High Court has 
not discussed the evidence. No reason ,has been 
indicated as to why the detailed analysis done by the trial 
F 
court deserved to be upset. The conclusions are factually 
incorrect. So far as the date on which the special report 
reached the Magistrate is concerned, the Judicial 
Magistrate has put his signature to have received the 
document at about 7.45 a.m. on 25.5.1997. But in the seal G 
.... .. 
of the court, the date is differently shown. Nevertheless 
date is recorded by the Magistrate to be 25.5.1997. The 
High Court also doubted the lodging of the FIR at the time 
of the claim. [Paras 8 and 6] [358-C; 357-E, F, G, H] 
351 
H 
352 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS. 
[2009] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal 
~ 
.. 
No. 300 of 2003 
From the final Judgement and Order dated 8.2.2002 of 
the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal No. 
B 273 of 1999. 
V. Krishnamurthy and R. Shunmugasundram,·Siddhartha 
Dave, VijayThakur, Senthil Jagadeesan, V. Ramasubramanian 
and P.N. Ramalingam, P.R. Kovilan Poongkuntran, R.V. 
-~ 
Kameshwaran, V. Vasudevan, Prashnath P., T. Harish Kumar, 
C R. Nedumaran, S. Thanajayan and K.V. Bharathi ·upadhyaya, 
with them for the appearing parties.·· 
· 
The Judgement of the Court was delivered by 
D 
DR .. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 
,,... 
1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment.of a Divisi.on 
.bench of the Madras High Court directing acquittal of the 
accused persons who faced trial for alleged cqmmission of 
offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of 
E the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC'). Learned 
Additional Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar had held the 
respondent accused persons guilty for causing the death of one 
Gurusamy Naicker (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') 
_., 
F 
on 25.~.1997 while he was sleeping in front of a shop. · 
2. Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows: 
Subbura} (PW1 ), Vivekanandan (PW2) a·re brothers and 
sons of the deceased. Gopaiakrishnasamy (PW5) is the brother 
G of the deceased. Rajavelusamy (A3) and Vasudevan (A4) are 
brothers. There is a Hir)du Primary School in S .. Thiruven-
katapuram which belonged to the Kammavar community. 
" 
Venkatasamy (PW 7) has beeh the administrator of the school 
for the past twenty years, as the President of the school by name 
H Rangasamy has not been there in the village for several years. 
\,( 
.., 
\. 
G. VIVEKANANDAN V. SRIRAMULU & ORS. 
353 
[DR ARIJIT PASAYAT J.] 
.. 
Apart from the Pr~.sident and Administrator, the Committee A 
consisted of seven members. One of the members by name 
Thiruppathi passed away. Without the knowledge of the people 
of th~t villag~d the accused grou~ .showing the 4
1
h accused as 
President, 2 
accused as Administrator and seven persons 
including first accused as members registered as the members B 
of the Association Committee in the office of the District 
Registrar, Virudhunagar. Jayaveeran (PW15) the District 
Registrar received the memorandum and bye-laws in this regard 
and effected registration on 06.05.1997. Coming to know about 
this, a meeting in the village was convened including P.Ws.7 c 
and 8. The meeting was held on 15.05.1997 and about 200 
persons participated in that meeting. It was resolved in that 
meeting to elect an able administrator and in that meeting the 
deceased Gurusamy was selected as the Administrator. In fact 
in the meeting, apart from P.Ws. 3 and 5, the accused also D 
_., 
participated. In the said meeting, the accused raised an objection. 
)' 
But however, the same was overruled and it was resolved to 
register on 27 .05.1

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.