he tied one end of the rope to a limb of the tree and anumberher round his neck and jumped but meanwhile the neighbours had assembled there and they caught him and cut him down from the tree and laid him on a company.
periyasamy thereupon threw the koduval away and retired to his shed and taking hold of a rope climbed a tree.
meanwhile a brother of periyasamy by name chinna ran to their father and informed him about the occurrence.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated january 18 1966 of the madras high companyrt in criminal appeal number 697 of 1965 and referred trial number 90 of 1965.
pappayee raised an alarm.
she was therefore declared hostile by the court and was allowed to be cross examined under s. 145 of the indian evidence act.
her previous statement was also brought on the record of the case.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 136 of 1966.
on the morning of the day of occurrence pappayee heard the cry ayyo ayyo and she states that she saw periyasamy striking his wife with a koduval.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by hidayatullah j. this is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the high companyrt of judicature at madras january 18 1962 by which the high companyrt companyfirmed the conviction of the appellant periyasamy under s. 302 indian penal companye and the 12 3 sentence of death imposed on him.
p. raman and a. v. rangam for the respondent.
the father.
without going to verify what he had heard went over to the police station house and lodged a report saying that his younger son had informed him that periyasamy had cut down his wife with a koduval and attempted to hang himself and that he was making the report.
this statement of pappayee forms the foundation of the case against periyasamy companyroborated by the other evidence about his conduct and the motive for the companymission of the offence.
the facts of the case are as follows periyasamy was charged with the murder of his wife kaveri ammal on the morning of may 11 1965 at 6 a.m. at a place in kirambur where they were residing in what is called a shed.
opposite to this shed was anumberher shed in which periyasamys brother with his wife pappayee p. w. 1 was residing.
periyasamy and kaveri ammal had been married for a period of two years during which time kaveri ammal used to go away frequently to her parents place and the motive suggested is that it used to enrage the appellant periyasamy.
periyasamy did number die though there is evidence to show that he had some bruises round his neck.
d. sharma for the appellant.
