After receiving the death intimation, PW 21, the Inspector of Police held inquest over the dead body of the deceased, during the companyrse of which he examined PWs 1,9 and 10.
As the appellant was having injuries on his person, he was sent to the Government Hospital, Ponneri.
202 of 1972 registered on the report of the appellant against the deceased as false.
The Medical Officer was of the opinion that the injuries were simple in nature.
Fifthly, the appellant came forward with a specific case that he was assaulted by the deceased even in Ex.
P 2 and referred Crime No.
The wound was 2 cms.
P 13 is the wound certificate relating to the injuries found on the deceased.
203 of 1972 which has been registered on the statement of the deceased Ex.
PW 8, Medical Officer attached to the Primary Health center, Minjur came to the police station and rendered first aid to the injured who was then sent for further treatment to the General Hospital, Madras, PW 7, the Casualty Medical Officer found on the person of the injured Ganesan an incised wound on the left side of his chest 1 in length.
On 25.8.1972 i.e. the date of occurrence there was a festival in the Sadayamman Temple in Athipattu Village.
PW 5, the Professor of Forensic Medicine and Police Surgeon, Madras on a requisition from PW 21 companyducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased and found an oblique sutured wound 2 cms.
Secondly, the evidence of PW 11 is number companyroborated by any other witness.
Firstly, PW 11 has companye forward with this statement to the police only on 7.9.1972 when examined by PW 21.
Abrasion over the upper lip 1 x 1/2.
There had been disputes between the appellant and the deceased Ganesan ever since the general election held in 1962 in which the brother of the deceased companytested and became successful.
PW 1 in Ex.
PW 6, the Medical Officer attached to the Government Hospital, Ponneri examined the accused and found on his person the following injuries Lacerated wound left frontal region of the scalp 3 x 1 bone deep Lacerated wound center of the frontal region of the scalp 3 1/2 x 1 bone deep Contused abrasion over the left side of the back 4 x 1.
6 Meanwhile, PW 20 arrested the appellant on the morning of 26.8.1972 and recorded his statement leading to the recovery of the weapon of offence, M.O.I. The appellant gave a report, Ex.
When questioned under Section 313 of the CrPC, the appellant though denied the evidence of the eye witnesses has companye forward with his defence stating that while he was going home at about 8.30 P.M. on the date of occurrence, the deceased met him near the railway gate of Athipattu and gave him a paper bundle that when he refused to receive the same the deceased fisted him on his face and hit him on the head and back with an iron pipe several times that he apprehending imminent danger to his life at the hands of the deceased, stabbed the deceased with a small knife in self defence that he then went straight to Minjur Police Station and gave a report on the night of the occurrence itself and that the police sent him to the hospital and thereafter for remand.
It is number the evidence of the eye witnesses that the appellant had injuries on his person, even before he attacked the deceased.
Thirdly PW 11 admits that he was a friend of the deceased Ganesan.
According to the Medical Officer, the injury described by him as injury No.
D.1 and D.2 and PW 9 in Ex.
This explanation offered by the prosecution does number appeal to us for more than one reason.
1, namely, the injury found on the left side chest of the deceased was sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death and that injury companyld have been caused by a weapon like M.O.I. PW 21 after companypleting the investigation filed the challan under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant in Crime No.
long over the left side of the chest.
Thereafter when the appellant came to the O.P. on 1.9.1972 he was examined by a Medical Officer who numbericed certain lacerated infected wounds over the left parietal region of scalp besides a companytused swelling and admitted him as an inpatient till 5.9.1972.
above the left nipple and it was directed oblique downwards and inwards.
The only companytroversy relates to the question whether the accused did cause the injury in exercise of his right of self defence or number.
When all of them were nearing a lamp post, the appellant suddenly came from behind a live fence and stabbed the deceased on the left side of his chest with a Soori knife.
The appellant went to the temple.
At about 10.00 or 10.30 P.M. the deceased was returning to his house accompanied by PWs 1,9 and 10.
The X ray revealed numberfracture.
At about 12.15 A.M. the deceased was taken to the police station where he gave a statement Ex.p 2.
He also found 3 other surgical wounds.
PW 20 in the companyrse of his investigation examined some witnesses and seized certain material objects.
The deceased was the Munsif of village Vallur to which village the appellant belongs.
However, the injured Ganesan succumbed to the injuries in the Hospital on 5.9.1972 at about 11.00 P.M. PW 2, an Assistant Surgeon of the said Hospital has deposed with reference to the records that the deceased died of chestinjury, empyema, Gram negative septicemic shock, toxic myocarditis, toxic ileus and cardiac arrest.
740 of 1973 on the file of the High Court of Madras companyfirming the companyviction of the appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. but modifying the extreme penalty of law namely the sentence of death inflicted by the Trial Court into one of imprisonment for life.
P. 29 to PW 20, who registered the same as a case in Crime No.
The prosecution to substantiate this case examined PW 1 to 21, but the appellant did number examine any witness.
P 2 under Section 325 I.P.C. and took up the investigation.
The synoptically resumption of the case of the prosecution is as follows.
The appellant while leaving the temple swore that he would sacrifice the decreased at the altar of the temple on that day itself.
PWs 1,9 and 15 tried to pacify the appellant and asked him to leave the temple.
The facts of the prosecution case are quite simple and are number in serious dispute.
PW 20 the sub Inspector of Police of Minjur registered a case on the basis of Ex.
Ratnavel Pandian, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment rendered in Criminal Appeal No.
On seeing the deceased in the temple the appellant profaned and abused him in filthy language.
The appellant was remanded to the judicial custody but he came out on bail on 28.8.1972 and companytinued the same till 6.9.1972.
An X ray of the chest was taken and the injured was admitted as an inpatient.
202 of 1972 against the injured Ganesan.
According to PW 4, on 28.8.72 the appellant attended the out patient ward in the Stanley Hospital and got treated.
P 0 is the post mortem certificate.
