P. 16.
1 to the village headman P.W. 5.
P. 1 to accused Nos.
The appellant belonged to the village of Pudupatti.
P. 1 and the accused has number been able to satisfy the Court that these two witnesses are in any manner interested in falsely implicating him.
The plea of the accused regarding P.Ws.
3 and 4 identified only accused Nos.
It is her evidence that both of them saw the appellant standing on the road side with an arival in his hand.
P.W. 4 also has substantially given the same version as P.W. 3.
The plea of the appellant was that there was a property dispute between his father and one Thathan Servai of his village about 20 years ago.
3 and 4.
P. 16 from his village pudupatti to Dindigul via Pallapatti.
It is her evidence again that Vemban got up and ran hither and thither and ultimately fell down dead.
So far as the companyplaint Ex.
Indian Penal Code, as well as the sentence of death passed by the Sessions Judge.
It has also been held that P.Ws.
The doctor has also stated that it was possible for the deceased after sustaining the injuries found on the body, to have run far a distance of about 300 to 400 before companylapsing.
P.W. 3 has further stated that on seeing this occurance, she went and informed P.W. 2, the son of the deceased, who was grazing cattle nearby alongwith certain others.
At that time, the appellant with his arival proceeded towards Vemban and gave him a blow in the first instance on his right hand.
A few months before the occurrence, the daughter in law of the appellant had companye to the village and was staying in the house of his elder brother.
3 and 4.
3 and 4 about the appellant being the assailant is false.
But it must be pointed out that numberovert act, so far as the actual crime is companycerned, has been attributed by P.W. 1 in Ex.
It is also pointed out that P.W. 4, who belongs to the same village as the accused, has stated that who knows the accused and that there is again numbereffective cross examination on this.
Thathan Servai was having a brick kiln and P.W. 1 used to buy bricks from him.
All the accused pleaded number guilty to the charge.
In this view both the learned Sessions Judge and the High Court accepted as true the evidence given by P.Ws.
That version does number find a place in the evidence given before the Court by either P.W. 3 and or P.W. 4.
Vemban is stated to have got up.
The appellant was further charged with having companymitted the murder of Vemban on October 12, 1968 at about 11.30 a.m. on the Pallapatti Pudupatti footpath shown in the sketch Ex.
3 and 4 were sitting a little further away.
On seeing the deceased companying on his cycle, the appellant attacked him with the arival and caused injuries on his two hands.
P.W. 3 immediately rushed up to his village Pudupatti and informed his fatherss brother P.W. 1 about the occurrence.
3 and 4 have number been able to identify the appellant who was the first accused.
The High Court on appeal has companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence.
She was further deposed that a little latter Vemban, the deceased, came in his cycle from Pddupatti and was proceeding towards Pallapatti.
P.W. 1 Perumal, brother of the deceased, who gave the companyplaint Ex.
The appellant, alongwith three others, was charged Under Section 120B read with Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for having entered into a criminal companyspiracy about a few days prior to October 12, 1968 to companymit the murder of one Vemban and that in pursuance of this companyspiracy, the appellant companymitted the murder of Vemban.
Both P.Ws.
3 and 4 regarding the occurrence.
That information was recorded by P.W. 5 at about 1.30 p.m. P.W. 5 came along with P.W. 1 to the scene of occurrence and after seeing the dead body, gave information to the Police at about 3 30 p.m. Investigation was started by the Police and the body was sent for post mortem examination.
Thathan Servai and P.W. 1 have companyspired to foist this criminal case against the appellant making use of the services of P.Ws.
At that time the appellant has filed a criminal companyplaint against thathan servai for companymitting the murder of his father, but the criminal Court even at the companymittal stage discharged Thathan Servai.
3 and 4 as eye witnesses have been given in Ex.
P1 is companycerned, there is numberdoubt, a reference to an obstruction stated to have been caused number only by the appellant but also the accused Nos.
P. 1 to an obstruct on stated to have been caused to the deceased by the other accused is of numberconsequence, so far as the appreciation of the direct evidence furnished by P.Ws.
The appellant was standing on the road side near Pallapatti with an arival.
P. 2 by P.W. 1 and the version spoken to before the Court by P.Ws.
There was a quarrel between the appellant and his daughter in law in the companyrse of which the appellant threw his shoes at his daughter in law which missed her but struck the deceased, who was present along with some other villagers at that time.
3 and 4 to give false evidence against him, Therefore the plea of the accused was that the case has been engineered against him by Thathan Servai and P.W. 1 and that the evidence of P.Ws.
3 and 4 being in the employ of Thathan Servai enemy of the appellant, were giving false evidence.
The Counsel also pointed out that the Magistrate, P.W. 11, who companyducted the identification parade of the accused has given evidence to the effect that P.Ws.
On October 12, 1968, the deceased was going in a cycle along the footpath shown in Ex.
So far as accused Nos.
The case of the prosecution was as follows.
3 and he further pointed out that P.Ws.
Both the learned Sessions Judge and the High Court have rejected the plea of the appellant that the case has been engineered by Thathan Servai and P.W. 1 and the view of the Courts is that the incident spoken to by the appellant involving Thathan Servai has taken place a long time ago and that there was numbermaterial on record to show that Thathan Servai has taken any interest regarding the present incident.
3 and 4 is false.
3 described above is necessarily fatal and that all the injuries found on the body of the deceased companyld have been caused by an arival.
3 and 4 were number giving any false evidence at the instance of Thathan Servai number has P.W. 1 been instigated to give any false companyplaint against the appellant.
P.W. 1 came to the place where the body of his brother was lying, and later on went to Dindigul about three miles from the scene of occurrence and gave the companyplaint Ex.
P.W. 3 is stated to have mentioned about this occurrence to P.W. 2, the son of the deceased who was grazing cattle in a nearby field.
He ran hither and thither for a short while and ultimately fell down dead.
In companynection with that dispute, thathan Servai murdered the appellant father.
As he found that she and P.W. 4 were having a companyversation on the middle of the road, the deceased rang the bell of his cycle, on hearing of which they moved to the side of the road.
3 and 4 are working in Thathan Servais brick kiln and they are under his companytrol.
So far as the appellant is companycerned, the learned Sessions Judge has found him guilty of the offence of causing the death of Vemban and has sentenced him to death.
3 and 4 being employees of Thathan Servai and as such interested in giving false evidence has been rejected.
Therefore the evidence of P.Ws.
according to P.W. 3, she was returning from Pallapatti to Padupatt.i after having got down earlier from a bus at Dindigul Padupatti was her village.
2 to 4 are companycerned, the learned Sessions Judge has held that the charge of companyspiracy has number been made out by the prosecution and as such has acquitted them of the offence with which they were charged Under Section 120B read with Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
This incident seems to have embittered the relations between the appellant and the deceased.
2 to 4.
Then a third blow on the chest was inflicted by the appellant.
The deceased abused the appellant for throwing the chappals on him.
3 and 4 have given evidence about their knowing the appellant and that evidence has been accepted.
He also pointed out that the names of P.Ws.
P. 1, it has been mentioned that the deceased, prior to the attack, was obstructed number only by the appellant but also by the other three accused.
346 of 1969, companyfirming the companyviction of the appellant, who was the 1st accused, for an offence Under Section 302.
P. 1 to the village Munsif P.W. 5 about the crime companymitted by the appellant.
A. Vaidialingam, J. This appeal by special leave, is directed against the judgment dated February 19, 1970 of the Madras High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
The learned Counsel also relied upon a minor circumstance regarding the direction in which the deceased was proceeding and urged there is a discrepancy between the evidence of P.W. 2 and the eye witnesses P.Ws.
The presence of the appellant was numbericed by P.W.s 3 and 4.
P. 1, regarding the present incident, is a very close friend and also related to Thathan Servai.
The Counsel also pointed out that in Ex.
2 to 4.
She has also referred to the fact that the second accused was nearby and that accused Nos.
P.W. 2 has stated that he went to hts village and informed his uncle P.W. 1, who gave the companyplaint Ex.
The main evidence relied on by the prosecution for proving the attack by the appellant on the deceased was that of P.Ws.
3 and 4, According to the Counsel, this evidence shows that the eye witnesses P.Ws.
All the points referred to by him have been companysidered by the High Court and rejected.
3 and 4.
The doctor P.W. 12 has, in the post mortem certificate, enumerated the three injuries found on the body of the deceased.
3 and 4 find a place in Ex.
On receiving these blows, Vemban is stated to have failed down from his cycle when the appellant gave another blow with the arival on his chest.
Ever since that incident there has been a very bitter enmity between the appellant and Thathan Servai and the latter has been doing his utmost to create trouble to the appellant.
On the way, she saw P.W. 4 companying in the opposite direction from podupatti to Pallapatti Both of them stood by the road side and were having a little companyversation.
As Vemban attempted to ward off the blow, a second cut was again given on his left hand on receipt of which, he fell down from his cycle.
