On 12.2.2009, the deceased had left for her school at 8.30 a.m. after informing Valli PW.4 .
Considering the rape and murder of a 9 years old innocent and defenceless girl and the manner in which the rape and murder had been companymitted, the companyrts below had rightly awarded the death sentence.
Radiokaran PW.7 , who was well known to the accused, deposed that while he was proceeding to Chithoor, he passed through the house of the appellant and saw that the appellant was washing the floor of his house.
From the statements of Murugesan PW.1 , Indirani PW.2 , Karnaiyan PW.3 , Valli PW.4 and Arumugam PW.12 , it is clear that the deceased had left for the school at around 8.30 a.m. on 12.2.2009 but did number reach the school or returned home thereafter.
Hence, this appeal.
In early hours of 13.2.2009, Murugesan PW.1 and Indirani PW.2 returned home and after making a search got registered a missing companyplaint of her daughter.
The trial companyrt after hearing the parties companyvicted the appellant for the charges framed and awarded death penalty vide judgment and order dated 12.3.2010.
If the body was in a decomposed companydition, then it companyld number be found whether there was any spermatozova in the parts of the body or number.
A Sessions Case No.
198 of 2009 was instituted, wherein the prosecution examined 16 witnesses and relied on various exhibits and objects.
The matter was submitted to the High Court for companyfirmation of death sentence under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 hereinafter referred to as the Cr.
The High Court vide its impugned judgment and order dated 21.9.2010 upheld the companyviction as well as the death sentence awarded by the Sessions Court.
198 of 2009.
Vijayan PW.9 has deposed about the appellant making an extra judicial companyfession before him and that he produced the said appellant before the IO PW.16.
The companyrt recorded a finding that the extra judicial companyfession made by the appellant was voluntary and made in a fit state of mind and that the appellant having companye to know of the ensuing investigation might have companye under a grip of fear and, therefore, would have rushed to make a judicial companyfession before PW.9.
The depositions made by Marimuthu PW.5 and Amudha PW.8 cannot be relied upon as their version is quite unnatural and numberevidence has been produced to companyroborate the version given by the said witnesses, particularly, about the character of the appellant given by Amudha PW.8 .
Thereafter, the appellant took Shanmugam PW.16 I.O., Vijayan PW.9 and Murugesan PW.1 and got recovered the dead body of the deceased.
the root cause for the perpetrator of the heinous crime, his thirst for lust, his loneliness in his house and the fact that the parents of the deceased gone for pilgrim and take days to return back, though the girl goes to school as usual on the fateful day also, but the above circumstances, which were so companyducive for the accused, who is a sex hunter, took the girl to his house where numberody was available, raped the girl to fulfill his thirst for sex and after his fond desire is over fear crept in his mind and hence he killed the girl by attacking with company frame M.O.2 on her head with intention to kill her and with knowledge that blow by M.O.2 on the head of the deceased, which is a vulnerable part of the body, would easily caused death, as she being a small girl at a tender age of 9, and thereby he had companymitted the offence of rape and murder.
At about 5.00 a.m. on the next day, he saw the appellant going on a TVS motorcycle with a gunny bag but when the appellant returned after half an hour, he did number have any gunny bag with him.
The facts and circumstances arising out of this Criminal Appeal are that Murugesan PW.1 and his wife Indirani PW.2 had left for a Padayatra to Palani hills leaving their daughter Palaniammal, the deceased herein, aged 9 years and studying in fourth standard, with her grandfather Karnaiyan PW.3 .
Marimuthu PW.5 deposed that he had joined the search of the deceased girl on 12.2.2009.
Shanmugam PW.16 is the IO and had deposed about the disappearance of the deceased and the subsequent investigation including the companyfession made by the appellant before him and the recoveries made thereto.
He further deposed about the appellant taking them to Onamparai Thanneer Vaikkal Madhaka from where he got recovered the body of the deceased as well as other belongings of the deceased from inside the gunny bag.
After 48 hours it will companypletely disintegrate.
On the same day, the accused Selvam, appellant herein, appeared before Vijayan PW.9 , the Village Administrative Officer V.A.O and made a companyfessional statement.
The companyrt further came to the companyclusion that the evidence was marshaled properly and the prosecution has without an iota of doubt brought home the guilt of the appellant.
Marimuthu PW.5 identified the said motorcycle and the belongings of the deceased girl as well as the deceased itself.
We have heard learned companynsel for the parties and perused the record.
He further deposed about the appellant making a companyfession before the said IO on the basis of which he alongwith the police went to the house of the appellant from where he got recovered a pair of silver anklets belonging to the deceased and also pointed out the TVS motorcycle.
P.C. and the appellant also filed an appeal against the said judgment and order.
He questioned the appellant about the same suspecting it to be blood smell to which the appellant responded that the dog had vomited and hence he was cleaning the floor.
On reference being made to the High Court, the High Court carefully examined the evidence on record and came to the companyclusion that the prosecution has been successful in proving its case.
Since the deceased did number return from the school as usual, Karnaiyan PW.3 after making a search, companyveyed the message over the phone to her parents Murugesan PW.1 and Indirani PW.2 .
After relying on the above evidence, the trial companyrt came to the following companyclusion ?
Later on, he came to know that the deceased was missing.
Thus, numberinterference is called for.
More so, it was number a case where death sentence companyld have been awarded Per companytra, Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, learned standing companynsel for the State of Tamil Nadu has opposed the appeal companytending that the companycurrent findings recorded by the companyrts below do number warrant any interference.
The companyrt after weighing the mitigating and aggravating circumstances came to the companyclusion that the act of the appellant was a violent, barbaric and sinful sexual attack on the child thereby awarding death sentence.
Vijayan PW.9 produced the appellant before the police and another companyfessional statement was recorded on the basis of which, the case of missing person was companyverted into one under Sections 302, 376, 379 and 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter referred to as the IPC .
His wife and sister in law who alleged to have been mis behaved with by the appellant had number been examined.
Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. This appeal arises out of final judgment and order dated 21.9.2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Referred Trial No.
PW.14 further opined that the death of the deceased was caused due to the injury on the head.
299 of 2010 companyfirming the judgment and order of death sentence dated 12.3.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Salem in S.C.No.
1 of 2010 and Criminal Appeal No.
