Madras High Court
Guru @ Gurunathan @ Balagurunathan …… vs State By on 17 December, 2025
Author: P.Velmurugan
Bench: P.Velmurugan
Crl.A.No.521 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.12.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
Crl.A.No. 521 of 2019
Guru @ Gurunathan @ Balagurunathan …… Appellant
S/o.Thangasamy
(Presently undergoing sentence in
Central Prison, Coimbatore)
Vs.
State by :-
The Inspector of Police,
Tiruppur South Police Station,
Tiruppur,
Crime No.790 of 2015. ……. Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., to call for the
records and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant
in the judgment dated 26.06.2019 made in S.C.No.109 of 2016 on the file of
the Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Tirupur.
For Appellant : Mr.P.M.Duraiswamy
For Respondent : Mr.A.Damodaran
Additional Public Prosecutor
assisted by Ms.M.Arifa Thasneem
Page 1 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm )
Crl.A.No.521 of 2019
JUDGMENT
(Order of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN, J.,) Challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 26.06.2019 in S.C.No.109 of 2016 passed by the Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Tiruppur, the appellant / accused has filed the present Criminal Appeal.
2. The appellant herein, who is the sole accused in S.C.No.109 of 2016 on the file of learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Tiruppur, stands convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 506(ii) and 309 IPC as follows:
Sl.No. Conviction Sentence
1. Section 307 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to, undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year.
2. Section 506(ii) IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years.
3. Section 309 IPC Fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo Page 2 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 additional rigorous imprisonment for six months.
The sentences imposed are directed to run concurrently.
The period of remand already undergone by the accused was directed to be set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Tiruppur, the sole accused has preferred the present Criminal Appeal before this Court.
3. Brief Facts of the Prosecution case are as follows:
(i) The victim (PW1), an XI standard student of Palaniammal Girls Higher Secondary School, Tiruppur, was acquainted with the accused, who was working as a tailor at S.S.Fashions Baniyan Company near her residence and they were in a love relationship. When the same came to the knowledge of the victim’s parents, she was warned and arrangements were made for her marriage with another person. On 14.09.2015 at about 5.15 p.m., while the victim was returning from school and walking near the Page 3 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 Adhidravidar Students’ Hostel, the accused came there on a Yamaha motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-42-Z-6757, waylaid the victim and insisted her to marry him. When the victim refused, stating that her marriage arrangements were in progress, the accused became enraged and, with the intention of causing her death picked up a bottle lying nearby, broke it, and attempted to stab her near the neck. The victim warded off the attack with her left hand and sustained an injury to her left thumb. When she attempted to flee, the accused pulled her dupatta and stabbed her on the neck with the broken bottle, causing her to stumble and fall. The accused then sat over her, picked up a stone lying nearby, and repeatedly assaulted her on the left side of her chest and face. Thereafter, he again used the broken bottle to stab her on the left side of her chest, eyelid, below the eyes, cheeks, and right hand, causing multiple injuries. When the public attempted to intervene, the accused criminally intimidated them by brandishing the broken bottle.
Thereafter, the accused inflicted injuries upon himself using a stone and the broken bottle on his neck and chest, thereby attempting to commit suicide.
(ii) On receiving information, the victim’s mother (P.W.2) came to the scene of occurrence and took the victim to the Government Hospital, Page 4 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 Tiruppur for treatment. On receipt of the information, P.W.8 Mani, Grade I Police Constable attached to Tiruppur South Police Station, visited the scene of occurrence and found that the victim had been taken to the Government hospital for treatment and also found that the accused, who had caused injuries to the victim, had also inflicted injuries upon himself and was bleeding. P.W.8 thereafter admitted the accused in the hospital, examined the victim and recorded her statement (Ex.P1). Subsequently, F.I.R. (Ex.P7) in Crime No.790 of 2015 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 309 IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act and forwarded the same to the Court and a copy was also sent to the Investigation Officer (P.W.10).
(iii) P.W.10 (Badhrunnisa Begum, Inspector of Police, i/c of Tiruppur South Police Station) took up the investigation, visited the place of occurrence, and prepared Observation Magazar (Ex.P3) in the presence of P.W.6 and P.W.9. She also drew the rough sketch (Ex.P9), seized the material objects and prepared seizure magazar (Ex.P8). Thereafter, P.W.10 recorded the statements of the witnesses, completed her investigation and handed over the case records to P.W.11 (Rajasekaran, Inspector of Police). P.W.11 took Page 5 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 up the case for further investigation and examined the witnesses. Since the witnesses reiterated what they had already stated before the first investigation officer, he did not record any fresh statements. P.W.11 recorded the confession statement of the accused, arrested and produced him before the jurisdictional Court, whereupon, the accused was remanded to judicial custody.
(iv) After completing the investigation and based on the materials and evidence collected, P.W.11 filed the charge sheet against the accused for the offences under Sections 307, 506(ii) and 309 IPC before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruppur and the same was taken on file in P.R.C.No.6 of 2016.
(v) On appearance of the accused, the provision of Section 207 Cr.P.C., was complied with and the case was committed to the Principal District and Sessions Court, Tiruppur as contemplated under Section 209(A) of Cr.P.C., in S.C.No.109 of 2016 and was made over to the Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court) Tiruppur, for trial. The trial Court framed charges against the accused for the offences under Sections 307, Page 6 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 506(ii) and 309 IPC. When the accused was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C., regarding the incriminating circumstances found in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the accused denied the allegations, and stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case and claimed to be tried.
(vi) In order to bring the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses (P.W.1 to P.W.11) and exhibited 9 documents (Ex.P1 to Ex.P9) and 12 material objects (M.O.1 to M.O.12). On the side of the defence, neither any witness was examined nor any document was marked.
(vii) The trial Court, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and materials on record, by judgment dated 26.06.2019, found that the accused is guilty of offences under Sections 307, 506(ii) and 309 IPC and thereby, convicted and sentenced him as stated supra.
4. Challenging the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the instant appeal is preferred by the appellant.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the Page 7 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 evidence of P.W.1 is inconsistent with the contents of the complaint (Ex.P1) on certain aspects. It was contended that the prosecution had not established any motive for the alleged offence and had also failed to prove, by oral or documentary evidence, that the appellant was in love with P.W.1 or that he intended to marry her. He further submitted that as per the prosecution case, the alleged occurrence took place at about 05.15 p.m on 14.09.2015 and that FIR (Ex.P7) was registered at 8.00 p.m., on the same day. Therefore, the delay in registration of the FIR (Ex.P7) indicates that it was registered after preliminary enquiry by the respondent-Police, and therefore, it cannot be treated as the First Information Report in the eye of law. On that basis, it was contended that the FIR is hit by Section 162 Cr.P.C and that the investigation based thereon is vitiated. He further submitted that, according to the prosecution, on the date of occurrence, i.e., on 14.09.2015, the accused had allegedly threatened the victim in the morning, which resulted in a quarrel between them, and that subsequently, in the afternoon the accused committed the alleged offence. However, it was contended that the prosecution failed to establish the presence of the accused at the scene of crime. It was further submitted that though the prosecution claimed to have seized (M.O.9) Yamaha motor cycle belonging to the accused from the place Page 8 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 of occurrence in the presence of the mazahar witnesses, P.W.6 and P.W.9, but they have not spoken about the seizure of the said vehicle. Hence, the seizure of the vehicle is doubtful.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the medical evidence does not support the prosecution case that the injuries allegedly sustained by the victim (P.W.1) could have been caused by an attack with a broken brandy bottle. It was also contended that, according to the prosecution, the accused was arrested on the basis of the alleged confession statement said to have been given in the presence of witnesses, namely Kaleeswaran and Thiagarajan, and thereafter remanded to judicial custody. However, neither of the said witnesses were examined before the trial Court nor the alleged confession statement was marked as an exhibit. It was further submitted that the prosecution failed to prove the recovery of material objects and the motive for the alleged offence. Hence, it was contended that the entire prosecution case suffers from perversity and that the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant are liable to be set aside.
Page 9 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019
7. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-Police submitted that P.W.1, who is the victim and an injured witness, has deposed about the occurrence and the role attributed to the appellant. Her testimony is stated to be supported by the evidence of P.W.3 to P.W.5, who were examined as eyewitnesses. It was also contended that P.W.7, the Doctor who examined P.W.1, issued the Accident Register and opined that the injuries sustained by P.W.1 were grievous in nature, which could have been caused by an assault by a known person. It was further submitted that the appellant was also admitted in the hospital on the same day and was found to have sustained simple injuries, which were self- inflicted. According to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the oral evidence adduced by the prosecution stands corroborated by the medical evidence and therefore, the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court do not warrant interference.
8. We have considered the submissions made on either side and also perused the entire records.
Page 10 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019
9. P.W.1, the victim and the injured witness deposed that on 14.09.2015, while she was returning home from the School, the accused approached her and insisted her to marry him. Upon her refusal, the accused allegedly took out a bottle and stabbed her with the same, causing injuries. P.W.2/mother of the victim, deposed that her son P.W.4, contacted her over a phone stating that a person was assaulting her daughter. She further deposed that when she reached the place of occurrence, she found her daughter was lying with bleeding injuries, and she took P.W.1 in an auto to the Government Hospital, Tiruppur for treatment.
10. P.W.4, who is the brother of the victim (P.W.1) deposed that on 14.09.2015, in the morning, he accompanied his sister to a shop situated near their house. While they were returning home, the accused allegedly approached them, placed a knife on the neck of P.W.1, and threatened that if she did not accept his love, he would do away with her entire family, and thereafter left the place. He further deposed that in the evening, when he went to see his sister, he noticed that the accused was hiding a broken bottle behind him and was speaking to her, and then suddenly the accused stabbed his sister on her cheek with the broken bottle. Thereupon, he went to bring Page 11 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 nearby persons to the scene.
11. P.W.3, who was examined as an independent eye witness, deposed that while he was proceeding towards his house, P.W.4 approached him and requested him to help his sister. When, P.W.3 went to the place of occurrence, he saw the accused sitting over the victim and stabbing her with a broken bottle on her cheek and chest. He further deposed that thereafter the accused inflicted injuries upon himself by stabbing his neck with the broken bottle. He further deposed that by that time, another auto driver arrived at the scene and pushed the accused away from the victim. Subsequently, the victim’s mother came to the scene and took her daughter to the hospital for treatment. P.W.5, who was examined as another eye witness, also deposed about the injuries caused by the accused to the victim. Thus, the evidence of P.W.1 corroborated with the evidence of P.W.2 to P.W.5.
12. P.W.7, the Doctor who examined both the victim and the accused, deposed that on 14.09.2015, while he was on duty at the Government Hospital, Tiruppur, both the victim and the accused were admitted as inpatients. On enquiry, the victim stated that she had been assaulted by a Page 12 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 known person. P.W.7 issued the Accident Register (Ex.P6) in respect of the victim and opined that the injuries sustained by the victim were grievous in nature. P.W.7 further deposed that he examined the accused, who stated that he had caused injuries to himself by stabbing himself with a bottle. The accused was treated at the Hospital and P.W.7 issued the Accident Register (Ex.P5) and opined that the injuries sustained by the accused were simple in nature.
13. From the medical evidence, the prosecution established that the victim sustained grievous injuries by a known person. Thus, the evidence of P.W.1 stands corroborated by the testimonies of the eye witnesses P.W.3 to P.W.5, as well as by the medical evidence. Accordingly, the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
14. On an overall appreciation of the evidence on record, it is evident that there was a prior love affair between the accused and the victim. When the victim refused to marry the accused, in a fit of anger, assaulted her and thereafter inflicted injuries upon himself. The materials on record indicate that the occurrence was not pre-planned, but arose out of a sudden Page 13 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 provocation during the course of interaction between the accused and the victim. Nevertheless, the prosecution has clearly established that the accused caused injuries both to himself and to the victim. The injuries sustained by the victim have been certified to be grievous in nature. Having regard to the nature of the weapon used, the manner of attack, and the part of the body targeted, the requisite intention can be inferred. Accordingly, the offence under Section 307 IPC stands attracted. At the same time, the absence of prior motive and the circumstances in which the incident occurred are relevant factors for consideration at the stage of sentence.
15. Having regard to the nature of the incident, the circumstances under which it occurred, and the absence of antecedents, this Court is of the view that the sentence of imprisonment for life is disproportionate to the facts of the case. At the same time, considering the grievous nature of the injuries caused to the victim, a substantive custodial sentence is warranted.
16. Accordingly, while confirming the conviction of the appellant under Section 307 IPC, the sentence of imprisonment for life imposed by the trial Court is modified to rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven Page 14 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 years. As far as sentence for other offences and the fine imposed by the trial Court shall remain unaltered. The sentences are ordered to run concurrently. The appellant shall be entitled for set off in accordance with Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the period of detention already undergone by him.
17. The conviction and sentence passed by the Court below in S.C.No.109 of 2016, is modified to the above extent and accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
(P.V., J.) (M.J.R., J.) 17.12.2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No ms Page 15 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 To
1. The Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Tirupur.
2. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Coimbatore.
3. The Inspector of Police, Tiruppur South Police Station, Tiruppur.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Page 16 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm ) Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 P.VELMURUGAN, J.
and M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
ms Crl.A.No.521 of 2019 17.12.2025 Page 17 of 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:37 pm )