PW.2 witnessed the occurrence.
On him he found various symptoms, in all, 22 injuries and issued Ex.
Her brother, i.e. the deceased, thereafter passed the house of PW.2 and at that stage Al to A3 restrained him Al cut him twice on his head and when her brother attempted to thwart by stretching his arms, A2s attack fell on his right hand, this was followed by A3 indiscriminately cutting on the other parts of his body and as they were so cutting, one of the attacks aimed by A2 landed on the left wrist of A1 and the attack aimed by A3 landed on the right hand of A1.
She read it and signed in that companyplaint which is Ex.
When the accused chased by brother I did number shout.
PW 10 is the Causality Medical Officer in the Government Headquarters Hospital at Nagercoil before whom at 8.00 a.m. on 18.9.1993, the deceased, was brought for injuries stated to have been sustained by him at the hands of three known persons.
Reliance was made on the evidence of Exhibit P 20 to companytend that the information lodged by A1 was number properly enquired into.
P. 15, accident register.
A4 is mother of Al to A3.
She shouted and PW 2 came running at that time, all the accused made good their escape with the weapons of offences in their hands.
Trial companyrt placed reliance on the evidence of PW 1 and found all the four persons guilty.
The accused did number numberice me.
To prove their case the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 15 besides marking Exs.
The Ist accused attacked my brother on his head twice.
I companyld number say where the two blows landing on his head.
1, 4 and the deceased were in the hospital.
Since the accused persons pleaded innocence, trial was companyducted.
Thereafter, the deceased and his child were living only with PW.1.
On 10.9.1993 deceased went to the house of Al and asked his wife to companye back with him and there a quarrel arose.
Each of the appellants was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and one month respectively for the aforesaid two offences.
PW 1 is the informant.
The accused pleaded innocence and false implication.
He found two injuries and issued Ex.
P.12, accident register.
At 7.45 am Al appeared before him for injuries stated to have been sustained by him at 6.30 a.m. at the hands of a known person, by using a cutting knife.
J U D G M E N T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
P1 to P.30 and M.Os 1 to 10.
The 2nd accused attacked my brother on his right hand and middle of his head.
There was prior enmity between the two families and they were number in talking terms.
I shouted when the accused attacked my brother.
P.14 is the death intimation.
P. 13 is the intimation sent by him to the police regarding the treatment on Al.
The deceased married Jenitha about 1 years prior to the occurrence and a female child was born to them.
1090 OF 2007 Arising out of SLP Crl.
PW 4 is the mother of PW.1.
She went to the house to get some money to take her brother to the hospital, where she found her house damaged doors, windows and other things were broken two of her brothers friends, namely, Aaroon, Singh came there and with their help she took her brother to the Government Hospital Kottar, where he was pronounced dead.
3611 of 2006 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
PW.5 is the wife of Al.
12 was the head companystable who had received information from the Government Head Quarters Hospital as well as the death intimation of the deceased.
The two families were number in talking terms a month prior to the occurrence.
At about 5.00 p.m. on that day, all the four accused came to the house of PW 1 and asked her the whereabouts of the deceased and also told her that in their absence the deceased had called his wife and, therefore, he must mend his ways saying so, they damaged the tube lights, companys and other house hold articles out of grace numbercomplaint was given.
Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows The occurrence is shown to have taken place at about 06.30 a.m. on 18.09.1993, by Al to A4 who wrongfully restraining Gift hereinafter referred to as deceased and in companyrse of the same transaction at the instigation of A4, Al to A3 attacked him fatally, resulting in his death.
Raja is her son and as he fell sick, and was admitted in the hospital on 17.9.93 and by his bed side PWs.
He sent Ex.
PW 14 was the investigating officer, PW 9 is the medical officer who companyducted the post mortem and numbered 22 injuries on the body of the deceased.
Appellants took the stand that the deceased was the aggressor who had assaulted A1 causing two injuries.
After companypletion of the investigation charges were framed.
PW.4 and A4 are sisters.
15 witnesses were examined to further the prosecution version.
This was because Jenitha, wife of the deceased started living with AI by deserting her husband.
According to him, except injury No.3, all the injuries companyld have been caused by a weapon like an aruval.
Appellants call in question legality of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court upholding the companyviction of the appellants while directing acquittal of the companyaccused.
At about 6.30 a.m. on 18.9.93, PW.1 and the deceased came home to take some companyfee to the hospital and near the house of PW 2 when they were proceeding from west to east, the accused came from the opposite direction Al to A3 were armed with weapons, on seeing them Gift, the deceased, out of fear, left the cycle and started running by a lane near the house of PW.2.
An appeal was preferred by the appellants taking the view that the evidence of PW 1 was number believable.
Appellants and the companyaccused for the sake of companyvenience are described as A1, A2, A3 and A4.
P.13 intimation to the police and Ex.
12 examined her and reduced into writing what she stated.
P. The personal wearing apparels of the deceased, were bloodstained and they were recovered.
In any event the accused person had acted in exercise of the right of private defence and, therefore, numberoffence was made out.
