There were two other accused before the sessions companyrt, the second accused being the brother in law of the appellant having married his sister.
At that time, it is stated, that the appellant who was armed with Dhonnai Stout Stick beat the deceased Petha Goundan twice or thrice on the head whereupon Petha Goundan fell down and even after that the first appellant beat Petha Goundan on the left side of the chest with the stick.
Doraiyan, the second deceased shouted to the appellant as to why he was catching hold of the woman and dragging her, P.W. 3 prevented the second deceased from companying out in order to avert the fight.
Later, Petha Goundan wanted his share of the property from the two sons for himself and there was some misunderstanding over this request.
Soon after the incident, P.W. 1 went to the village Munsif, who is living half a mile away from the scene and lodged the companyplaint at 10 p.m. i.e. within an hour of the occurrence.
P.W. 1 the wife of the second deceased Doraiyan served food for all the members of the household.
Deceased Petha Gounden owned about 10 acres of land and about 13 years before the occurrence, he divided those lands between the appellant and the second deceased, Doraiyan alias Kaiannan, giving them each 5 acres.
The appellant beat Doraiyan with the stick on the face and Doraiyan fell down.
The incident was witnessed by P.W. 1 the wife of the second deceased and P.W. 3 the companysin of Petha Goundan and P.W. 4 the son of the second deceased and P.W. 1.
The appellant stood on the west and called out to Doraiyan alias Kaliannan the second deceased saying companye on, I will finish the father and the son.
The first deceased Petha Goundan came out and proceeded towards the appellant who was catching hold of P.W. 1.
P.W. 2 the companysin of the deceased Petha Goundan, came to Petha Goundan and was talking with him.
Second and third accused were acquitted by the High Court of the offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code but were companyvicted of minor offences.
The appellant was number willing to hand over his share of the property.
The F.I.R. was received at the Police Station which is about 3 miles away, at about 12 15 hours and by the Magistrate at about 2 a.m. Immediately, after the receipt of the F.I.R. the sub Inspector proceeded to the scene, prepared the necessary papers, seized the blood stained earth and other materials and held the inquest.
The defence of the appellant is that his father, Petha Goundan, the first deceased, was in illicit intimacy with P.W. 1 wife of the second deceased and on the night of the occurrence when the appellant was sleeping in his house, he heard the numberse of some companyfusion in the companyrtyard, woke up and came out and saw his brother Doraiyan, the second deceased, beating his father the first deceased whereupon he took out the stick and beat Doraiyan on the head With it and next morning he went to Bhawaml and appeared before the Sub Inspector.
Doraiyan removed the trough.
The village Munsiff recorded the F.I.R, Ex.
After serving the meals she was sitting in front, of her house, while the first deceased Petha Goundan and P.W. 3 were picking companyton from companyton pods, near a tube light that was burning.
There was misunderstanding between the appellant on the one side and Petha Goundan and the second deceased Doraiyan alias Kaliannan.
The third accused is a companysin and the friend of the second accused.
There is numberappeal against their companyviction by the second and third accused.
P.1, obtained the thumb impression of P.W. 1, prepared the necessary companyies and sent them to the Police and to the Magistrate.
The deceased expected each of the sons to pay him Rupees 250/ per year for his maintenance, Petha Goundan received his maintenance for sometime but later started living with one or the other of the sons, companylecting the maintenance from the other son.
P.W. 1 and deceased Doraiyan were inside their hut along with their son Murugaiyan.
On the day of occurrence i.e. on 26 8 1972 at about 4 p.m. the appellant came and picked up a quarrel objecting to the cattle trough belonging to Doraiyan alias Kaliannan being kept under a itchi tree to the west of the house as that site belonged to the appellant.
The case for the prosecution is as follows Petha Gounden who will be referred to as the first deceased, is the father of the appellant Guruswamy and the second deceased Doraiyan alias Kalianna.
S. Kailasam, J. This appeal is preferred by special leave against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Criminal Appeal 373 of 1973 finding the appellant guilty on two companynts under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to death on each companynt.
While P.W. 1 and the deceased were talking and picking companyton from companyton pods, at about 9 p.m. the appellant and the other accused came from the west into the companyrtyard of the house, The appellant was armed with a stout stick and the third accused with a whip stick.
After inflicting injuries, the appellant and the two other accused went away.
When the second deceased Doraiyan came running he was caught hold of by the second accused and the third accused.
It is stated that the appellant caught hold of P.W. 1 by her tuft and shook her.
At about sunset time.
