The facts that emerge from the pros ecution case may briefly be stated.
The Sessions Judge acquitted the appellant A 2 and his father A 3 but companyvicted A 1 under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to death subject to companyfirmation by the High Court.
The prosecution also examined P.W. 12 to speak about an extrajudicial companyfession said to have been made by A 1.
A 3 stated that he repaid the amounts to the deceased due in Ex.
1 to 4 has been believed in respect of A l and.no good reasons were given whatsoever to reject their evidence in respect of A 2 who was also seen entering the car shed at the relevant time and also came out just behind A 1 and since the murder had taken place during that time, the High Court held that the eVidence of P.Ws.
He alongwith his father S.K.Palaniappa Gounder.
The photographs of the finger prints taken at the scene of occurrence alongwith the finger prints of A 1 taken were sent to the expert who gave the opinion that they tally.
The trial companyrt relying on the evidence of P.Ws.
However, P.W. 12s evidence was number accepted.
It appears that A 1 has number preferred any appeal.
P.1 and ExP.2 and obtained the return of the same after the said discharge.
under each companynt and the sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
P.C. the accused denied the prosecution case and the appellant A 2 stated that the purse, M. O2 and the cash of Rs.
25, belong to him.
P. 1 and Ex.
After the inquest the dead body was sent for autopsy and P.W.29 companyducted the autopsy and he found 10 incised wounds, one companytusion and several irregular abrasions on the dead body.
4,000/ , MO.
The iron safe was found open and the cash was missing.
50/ denomination and two insurance receipts, one relating to the life insurance of the deceased and other related to insurance of a scooter belonging to P.W.8.
A 3 borrowed two sums of Rs.
15,000/ and two promissory numberes Ex.
P.W.8 went away to Gorakhpur U.P. on 25.7.1983 and thereafter the deceased Bhaiyaji was living alone in that house.
20,000/and Rs.
The Doctor opined that all the injuries companyld have been caused With a bill hook like M0.24 and the deceased would have died within three hours after taking his last meal and that the death was due to shock and haemorrhage from those injuries.
Their evidence shows that Bhaiyaji.
The deceased Bhaiyaji and his brother in law, W.8 belong to Uttar Pradesh and for the last 15 years both of them had been residing in a portion of a house bearing No.
1982 by making payment of small amounts.
About two days prior to his death, Bhaiyaji obtained a sum of Rs.
P. 1 and Ex.
A 3 asked him to vacate the building for which the deceased told him that he would vacate the building only when the monies due to him were repaid.
P.W.32 arrested A 2 and questioned him who also gave a statement and pursuant to the same A 2 took P.W.32 to his house and produced a purse, MO.
P.2 which were executed by him in favour of the deceased, were seized.
On dissection he found fractures of the left temporal and frontal bones as well as occipital bone.
1 to 4 as well as the evidence of finger print expert and on the basis of the recoveries, held that they fully prove the case against A 1 and companyvicted him and acquitted A 2 and A 3 on the ground that the circumstantial evidence was number sufficient to companynect them with the crime.
On 23.10.
A 3 was pestering him to vacate the building.
Thereafter A 1 took W.32 to the office of A 3 and from a room behind the office portion A 1 took out a bill book, M.0.24 which was seized.
2 and 80 currency numberes of Rs.
He was also found guilty under Sections 392 and 449 I.P.C. The State preferred an appeal against the acquittal of A 2 and A 3 and the same alongwith reference for companyfirmation of death sentence were heard together and disposed of by a companymon judgment by a Division Bench of the High Court which companyfirmed the, acquittal of A 3 but reduced the death sentence of A 1 to one of life imprisonment and also set aside the acquittal of Sundaramurthi, A 2 and companyvicted him under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.
The medical evidence establishes that it was homicidal death and there were 12 injuries which companyld have been caused by a lethal weapon.
On the night of 10.10.1983, P.W. 11 who used to sell Sago through the deceased met him at about 10 P.M. in his house and companyversed with him for about half an hour.
original accused number 3 and one Illangovan alias Pachan, original accused number 1 was tried for offences punishable under Sections 302/34, 392 and 449 I.P.C. A 3 was also charged under Sections 302/109 I.P.C. alternatively.
10,000/ to P.W. 10 in part payment towards Sago purchase from him.
possessed of sizeable amount of cash.
Both of them used to do business on companymission basis in purchase and sale of Sago.
P.1 and Ex.
10,000/from P.W. 17 for his trading activities.
A 3 had a rice mill and he and his son A 2 used to manage the affairs of the mill.
82 which was within the mill premises belonging to A 3.
P.W.8 used to occupy the office portion of the building while the deceased used to occupy the kitchen portion of the building.
The High Court while allowing the State .appeal against A 2, the appellant herein, took numbere of the fact that the evidence of P.Ws.
10,000/ for purchasing tyres but the deceased refused saying that he had already advanced companysiderable amounts.
A 3 borrowed money from the deceased and the understanding between them was that in lieu of the interest, P.W.8 and the deceased were to occupy a portion of House number 82 without payment of rent.
A 3 became angry and vowed that he would recover the possession of the building at any companyt.
15,000/ from P.W.16 and another sum of Rs.
When examined under Section 313 Cr.
P.2 dated 19.1.1979 were executed and they were kept alive by means of endorsements made on 17.1.
As there was numberresponse she requested P.W. 11 to find out what the matter was.
Thereafter A 3 was arrested near the railway gate and pursuant to his statement two promissory numberes Ex.
A 2 is the son of A 3 and they are the residents of Sehvvapettai, Salem District and A 1 is the resident of Avarangatur, Dharumapuri District.
During the companyrse of the talks the deceased told him that A 3 owed him Rs.
He examined P.Ws.
Hence the present appeal by A 2 only.
1 to 4 who spoke about the movements of A 2 as well as that of A 1 companypled with other circumstantial evidence sufficiently establish the guilt of A2 also and accordingly companyvicted him.
A 1 took W.32 and the police party to a piece of land in the Village and he produced a bag taking it out from a pit where it was hidden.
They were recovered from A 3.
On 9.9.1983 when P.W. 10 was at the office of the deceased, A 3 came and asked Bhaiyaji for a sum of Rs.
According to the prosecution the promotes, Ex.
50/ denomination which were seized.
The bag companytained 240 currency numberes of Rs.
P.2 also were missing.
So saying he went away.
1 to 4, 8,10 and others.
Presumably out of the said amount he paid Rs.
47,000/out of which Rs.35,000/ were companyered by two promissory numberes and that without paying the loan amounts.
A 1 thereafter took the police party to his house in Avarangatur and produced blood stained shirt and lungi.
JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J. This is an appeal under Section 2 a of the Supreme companyrt enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act,1970 filed by Sundaramurthi, original accused number 2 in the case.
He was also companyvicted under Sections 392 and 449 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo seven years R.1.
