Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned principal Sessions Judge, Salem, rendered in Sessions Case No. 189 of 1988, dated 30th April, 1986, convicting the appellant/accused under S. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment, for having murdered his father Arunachalam, by attacking with a crowbar on his head at about 11.00 p.m., on 5-4-1985, at his residence in Rasipuram, Salem District, within the limits of Rasipuram police station, as committed to by the Judicial II Class Magistrate, Rasipuram, in P.R.C. No. 9 of 1985, on 13-9-1985.

2. The case of the prosecution as held out from the recorded and documentary evidence before the Sessions Judge are briefly stated as follows :-

The deceased is the father of the appellant/accused. Both were residing jointly in a house situate in Thiruvenkatavilas Palli Street, in Rasipuram Town. The appellant/accused was employed in a soda factory at Rasipuram, belonged to one Sundaram, on a daily wage of Rs. 10/-. As the earnings by the appellant/accused was not adequate, proposing to start a soda factory of his own, the appellant wanted to raise a loan on his house and thereby the insisted his father, the deceased, to get a loan for him.

19. Let us now analyse the evidence of the medicos available in this case. PW 5 is the doctor attached to the Government Hospital, Rasipuram who admitted the deceased Arunachalam at about 11.45 p.m. on 5-4-1985, as brought up by one of his relatives, as is evidence from Ex. P. 6, the copy of the Accident Register and Ex. P. 7, the intimation sent to the police by PW. 5.

20. According to PW 6 Dr. Murugesan, attached to the Government Hospital, Salem, he admitted the deceased Arunachalam in the hospital as an in-patient at about 1.00 a.m. on 6-4-1985, as referred to PW 5 for further treatment, as evident from Ex. P. 8, the case sheet regarding the treatment of the deceased. PW 7, Dr. Singaravelu, Assistant Surgeon, attached to the Government Hospital, Salem has deposed to the fact that he had given treatment to the deceased as per Ex. P. 8 and that the deceased died on 11-4-1985, at about 4.30 a.m. without receiving consciousness and that he had sent the dead intimation Ex. P. 9 to the police. PW 8, Dr. Viswanathan, has spoken to the fact that he conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased at about 1.00 p.m. on 11-4-1985 as per the requisition Ex. P. 10, given by PW 12, the Inspector of Police, Rasipuram and issued Post-mortem Certificate Ex. P. 11. All these witnesses and exhibits would clearly demonstrate the fact that the deceased Arunachalam had been attached at about 11.00 p.m. on 5-4-1985 with a weapon like M.O. 1 and that whereupon he had been firstly taken to the Government Hospital, Rasipuram and then he had been referred to the Government Hospital, Salem at about 1.00 a.m. on 6-4-1985, admitted therein as an in-patient and on 11-4-1985 at about 4.30 a.m. he succumbed to the head injury caused upon his person which was likely to cause death in the ordinary course of nature, as opined by the doctor. The deceased Arunachalam died due to homicidal violence perpetrated by the assailant, whoever it may be, at about 11.00 a.m. on 5-4-1985.

25. One another significant aspect, in our view, cannot at all be avoided, is the main flank of attack projected by the learned counsel for the appellant that there was an inordinate delay in sending Ex. P. 16 along with Exs. P. 1 and P. 2 to the Court and this delay had not been properly explained by the prosecution. In this regard, we have seen that Ex. P. 1 had been recorded by PW 1 at about 11.30 p.m. on 5-4-1985 to the narration of the appellant and that thereafter PW 1 had prepared Ex. P. 2 and took the appellant along with MO 1 and Exs. P. 1 and P. 2 to the Rasipuram Police Station within an hour covering a walkable short distance of one kilometer and whereupon, PW 11, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Rasipuram Police Station received Exs. P. 1 and P. 2 and the accused and put the appellant in the lock up by registering a case under Rasipuram Police Station Cr. No. 156 of 1985 against the appellant and recovering the crowbar MO 1 under Form-95. The First Information Report prepared by PW 11 was marked as Ex. P. 16. PW 11 claims that he has sent the F.I.R. Ex. P. 16 along with Exs. P. 1 and P. 2 to the Rasipuram Court immediately. But, it is seen that those documents have reached the Magistrate's Court at Rasipuram by 12.00 Noon on 6-4-1985. The evidence of PW 11 is that his police station was at a distance of 500 feet from the Magistrate's Court which distance can be crossed by two minutes by walk and that further the Government Hospital, Rasipuram was also within a walkable distance from his place. On a question put by the learned trial Judge, PW 1 has answered that on 6-4-1985, as the Magistrate at Rasipuram was on leave, for handing over Exs. P. 1, 2 and 16 to the Magistrate in charge it took 12 noon on 6-4-1985. Basing upon the above said factual aspects, the learned counsel for the appellant projected the above attack upon Exs. P. 1, 2 and 16 as there is an unexplained inordinate delay rendering the prosecution case as highly suspicious and that delay was attributed to PWs 1 and 11, who prepared Exs. P. 1 and P. 2 by obtaining the signature of the appellant on blank papers and created the same on the next day viz., on 6-4-1985 and that was the reason why the delay has happened.