Crl. A (Md). No.431 of 2010
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Bench: Hon’ble S.Nagamuthu J., Hon’bleV.S.Ravi J.
Date of judgment: 15/07/2016
Relevant Acts/Sections:
- Section 120(B) of IPC (Punishment of criminal conspiracy)
- Section 302 of IPC (Punishment for murder)
- Section 201 of IPC (Causing disappearance of evidence of the offence, or giving false information to screen offender)
- Section 374 of IPC (Enticing or taking away or detaining with criminal intent a married woman.)
- Section 34 of IPC (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.)
- Section 364 of IPC (Kidnapping or abducting in order to murder.)
- Section 313 of IPC (Causing miscarriage without woman’s consent.)
- Section 161(3) of IPC (The police officer may reduce into writing any statement made to him in the course of an examination)
- Section 30 of IPC (“Valuable security”)
- Section 133 of IPC (Abetment of assault by soldier, sailor or airman on his superior officer, when in the execution of his office)
- Section 114 of IPC (Abettor present when an offence is committed)
- Section 27 of IPC (Property in possession of wife, clerk or servant)
Backstory
PW-1 The mother of the deceased
PW-2 The brother-in-law of the deceased
PW-3 The Village Administrative Officer of Balakrishnapuram
PW-4 The brother of the deceased
PW-14 The Head Constable, who carried the First Information Report to the Court.
PW-15Dr.P.Manoharan, autopsy conducted by him
Accused1.T.Kamalakkannan
Accused 2.P.Siva
Accused 3.S.Suresh @ Suresh Kumar
Accused 4.K.Veeramani
In this case, the deceased was Mr.T.Murugan. The father of the deceased had married Mrs.Ponnammal as his second wife and he did not give a share in the ancestral properties to the deceased as well as his daughter. The deceased filed a Civil Suit against his father for partition and to conduct the said Civil Suit, he borrowed money from various persons. The persons, who lent money to the deceased, started pressuring him to repay the said loan amount. Due to a huge loss in agriculture and Civil Case was still pending; he was not able to repay the loan amount. 11/2 years before 04.02.2005, the deceased told his sister – Mrs.Nagalakshmi that he was going to some other place to do some job and earn money. On 02.10.2003, at 10.00 AM, PW-1 was informed by him that he was staying in Thiruppur and working in a Lottery Shop. PW-1 made a complaint to the police on 04.02.2005, at Noon, complaining that her son was found missing.
The Head Constable, attached to the Dindigul Taluk Police Station registered a case in as First Information Report(FIR). Then, according to the brother-in-law of the deceased, on 21.04.2005, the fourth accused – Mr.K.Veeramani, who was standing on the road near the house of the deceased, was shouting that he along with the others, had killed the deceased. caught his hold and took him to the office of the Village Administrative Officer of Balakrishnapuram.where further inquiry was done.of all accused
On 21.04.2005, the fourth accused was produced, Mr.Ramadoss, the Inspector of Police, interrogated him. The fourth accused disclosed the place, where the dead body was lying. He took the Inspector of Police, PW-3, and the witnesses to Sirumalai and identified the place on the west of the main road. The Inspector of Police found that at a distance of 105 meters down from the hill, a human skeleton was found hanging on the branch of a tree. A blue color pant and a white color shirt were found on the skeleton. The skull was found lying on the ground, at a distance of one foot from the bottom of the tree. There was no flesh found anywhere near the place of occurrence or on the skeleton. A waist cord was found around the hip. He conducted inquest on the body of the deceased between 10.00 AM and 12.00 noon, on 22.04.2005, at the place where the skeleton was found.
Based on the above materials, the Trial Court framed appropriate charges. To prove the charges, 17 witnesses were examined, 35 documents and 6 material objects were marked.
This is a case based on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution has established that the deceased was found missing for about 11/2 years. There can be no reason to doubt the said fact. The dead body was found on the west of the road at Sirumalai. The superimposition examination conducted has established that the dead body was that of the deceased. Similarly, the DNA examination conducted also has proved that the dead body was that of the deceased. Thus, the prosecution has proved that the dead body, which was found at Sirumalai, was that of the deceased.
Postmortem Findings
The autopsy was conducted by Dr.P.Manoharan, a Civil Surgeon, on 22.04.2005, at 03.30 PM. He found only the skeleton and the skull and noticed as follows:
In the skull, left parietal bone was missing; only two teeth are present in the upper jaw. The chest and limb bones were covered in the clothes, shirt, and pants. The bones were removed from the clothes and examined. Skull broke into two pieces. The limb bones sacrum pelvis, Femur, Tibia, Humerus, Scapula, Rib bones were seen separately. Left Tibia Fibula, Carpel, Tarsal, Metatarsal bones are missing. Sternum, Ribs bones were seen in a separated condition. Vertebral bones 22 numbers are seen. Collar bones both side seen. The cause of death of the deceased could not be given.
Judgment
The Criminal Appeal is allowed; the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellants, by Judgment dated 28.10.2010, made in S.C.No.132 of 2010, on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge [FTC] Dindigul, was set aside and the appellants are acquitted. Fine amount, if any, paid by the appellants would be refunded to them. Bail bond executed by the appellants and the sureties shall be terminated.