P. 10 and the pant and shirt under Mazahar Ex.
The High Court companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence of death passed on the appellant.
Natesan narrated to them the details of the incident and then a taxi was brought and Natesan, Manisekaran and Angamuthu placed the deceased in the taxi for taking her to the hospital.
When the appellant was running away after stabbing the deceased, he was seen by three persons, namely, Angamuthu, Madhavan and Sundererajan, who were sitting at Marismman Temple situate in the same street on which the petty shop was situate.
Soon after the lodging of the first information report the appellant, according to the prosecution, presented himself at the police station with the knife and the police arrested him and seized the knife as also the shirt and pant which he was wearing The knife was seized under Mazahar Ex.
On 11th March, 1974 at about 8.15 p.m. Natesan was in his tailoring shop.
On entering the house, he saw the appellant standing with a knife in his right hand and asking the deceased to have sexual intercourse with her and threatening her that if she refused, he would kill her.
He had also a small petty shop adjoining his house on the western side which was looked after by the deceased.
However, on the way the deceased died and so Natesan asked Mirisekaran and Angamuthu to take the deceased to the hospital and he proceeded to the police station to lodge the first information report.
Natesan was a tailor by profession and he had his tailoring shop in Sannadhi Street about a furlong away from his house.
The appellant preferred an appeal to the High Court of Madras and the case was also referred to the High Court for companyfirmation of the death sentence.
He had an apprentice by the name of Manisekaran.
who regularly taking his meals with Natesan since sometime before the date of the incident, as he was unmarried and had numberemployment at the relevant time.
The appellant, who is the son of the maternal uncle of Natesan.
In the mean time, Manisekaran had also companye inside the house on hearing the numberse and he also witnessed the stabbing of the deceased by the appellant.
The appellant was thereafter charge sheeted for the offence of murdering the deceased and he was companyvicted and sentenced to death by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Salem.
He sent Manisekaran to his house with some edibles for his children.
Natesan was number then in the house and when he came back at night the deceased companyplained to him about the improper companyduct of the appellant, on which Natesan chastised the appellant on the next day.
According to the prosecution, about three months prior to the date of the occurrence the appellant made advances to the deceased and wanted to satisfy his lust by sexual intercourse with her, but she spurned him and drove him out of the house.
These two Mazahars were attested by A. Saleam and Rajarathnam.
The companyviction of the appellant rests on the oral testimony of Natesan and Manisekaran who claimed to be eye witnesses to the murder of the deceased.
The deceased definitely stated that she would refuse to submit to him even if she were to die.
When Natesan was talking to Manisekaran, he heard a numberse from inside the house and he immediately rushed into the house.
The appellant thereupon threatened that he would stab Natesan also, if he came near him The appellant then tried to stab the deceased with the knife and in her effort to ward off the attack, she received three stab wounds on her left hand fore arm.
Manisekaran went to the house of Natesan and finding the deceased in the petty shop, he handed over the edibles to her and she took the edibles went into the house.
Natesan left his tailoring shop at about 5.30 p.m. and reached the house at about 9 p.m. Manisekaran was at that time standing in front of the patty shop and Natesan also stopped there and started talking to Manisekaran.
When they saw the appellant running with a knife in his hand, they questioned him and he replied stating that he had stabbed the wife of Natesan tailor and wreaked vengeance Angamuthu, Madhavan and Sunderarajan thereupon proceeded to the house of Natesan and saw the deceased lying with her legs inside the house and her head and body in the verandah.
Natesan, on seeing this shouted to the appellant chandal this is an atrocity.
They asked Natesan as to why he was standing quietly when the appellant was running away stating that he had stabbed Natesans wife.
Hence the present appeal by special leave obtained from this Court.
One Natesan and his wife Ranganayaki, to whom we shall for the sake of companyvenience, refer as the deceased, were living together in a house situate at Mutth Undal Lane in Nammakkal.
N. Bhagwati, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the companyviction and sentence of death imposed by the Additional sessions Judge, Salem and companyfirmed by the High Court of Madras.
