MURUGAN & ORS. versus STATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU

Citation: [2007] 12 S.C.R. 852 · Decided: 04-12-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
MURUGAN & ORS. 
v. 
STATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU 
DECEMBER 4, 2007 
B 
[S.B. SINHA AND HARJIT SINGH BEDI, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860; Ss. 302 & 324: 
c 
Murder-Testimony of eyewitnesses-Accused and accomplice 
armed with weapons forming unlawful assembly attacked deceased 
and others resulting in death of deceased and injury to others-Trial 
Court found accused-appellant No.I guilty of committing murder 
convicting him u!s. 302 /PC and sentencing him to life imprisonment 
D and found accused Nos. 8, 9& JO of committing offence u!s. 324 and 
sentencing them to one year rigorous imprisonment-Affirmed by High 
Court-On appeal, Held: Prosecution witnesses not only described the 
incident in detail but also identified the crime weapons which were 
seized at the instance of accused persons-No cogent reasons advanced 
E by accused to disprove trustworthiness of PWs.-Their evidence 
believed by Courts below-Intention to commit murder of the deceased 
and bodily injury to others by accused gathered from the backdrop of 
events and circumstances attending thereto-Infliction of single injury 
on the deceased by itself is not a relevant factor to hold that assailant 
had no intention to commit murder of the deceased-Hence, there exist 
F no reason to differ with the order of the Courts below-Criminal trial-
Testimony of prosecution witnesses-Trustworthiness. 
According to the prosecution, on the fateful day, when a 
procession was taken out by the people in the village for celebrating 
G a festival, the accused persons who were 11 in number allegedly 
formed an unlawful assembly with an object of committing murder 
of PWS and others to take revenge from them, as earlier one of them, 
the deceased, had instituted a criminal case against the accused 
persons. They were carrying weapons. Accused No.1 and accused 
H 
852 
. ~ 
t 
MURUGANv. STATETHROUGHINSPECTOROF 
853 
POLICE, TAMILNADU 
No.3 had instigated others to commit murder of PW-5. Accused No.4 A 
attacked PW-5 with a stick causing a fracture on his right hand. When 
the deceased intervened, accused No.4 instructed accused No.2 to 
kill him also. Consequently, accused No.2 caught hold of the hands 
of the deceased, whereas accused No.6 caught hold of his shoulders, 
and accused No. 7, appellant No.1 stabbed him with a knife on his B 
chest and also caused an injury on PW-1, whereas accused No.8 
attacked PW-1 with a cycle chain causing an injury on his head. 
Appellant No.3- accused No.9 attacked PW-3 with a knife on his 
nose and head whereas accused No.10 attacked PW-3 with a cycle 
chain and caused injuries to him. A First Information Report was c 
lodged immediately after the occurrence by the victims. Out of 11 
accused, only accused No. 7 and 8 to 10 were convicted and sentenced 
by the trial Court. Accused No. 7 was convicted for committing the 
offence punishable u/s.302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life 
/ 
imprisonment; accused Nos. 8 tolO were convicted for committing 0 
the offence punishable u/s. 324 IPC and they were sentenced to 
undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment. Appeal filed thereagainst was 
dismissed by the High Court. Hence the present appeals. 
Counsel for the accused-appellants contended that appellant 
No.1 having inflicted only one blow with a knife on the deceased, E 
the offence, if any, committed by him falls under Section 304 Part II 
of the Indian Penal Code and not under Section 302 thereof; and that 
all the other accused having caused only simple injuries, sentence 
of one year's rigorous imprisonment is on the higher side. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. The nature of evidence of the eye-witnesses to the 
occurrence whereupon strong reliance has been placed by both trial 
Court as also the High Court in identical in nature. 
F 
[Para 6] (858-B] G 
1.2. PWl, in his statement before the trial Court, not only 
described the incident in great details but also identified the material 
objects which were seized at the instance of the accused persons 
being the weapons of offence. Evidences of PW-2 and other H 
854 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2007] 12 S.C.R. 
A witnesses are also on the same vein. [Para 8] (858-H; 859-A] 
1.3. Appellants had a motive. They came in a group. All of them 
were armed. Both parties are related to each other. An occurrence 
had taken place earlier giving rise to initiation of a criminal case by 
) 
B the deceased against the accused. Accused persons, with a view to 
A 
take revenge, caused mu

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