TAC 5667 in which the three accused persons are alleged to have travelled extensively, cut photograph of Vivekanandan was found along with Rs.13,000/ under the back seat.
The auto driver Paraman Paramasivam PW 15 who was the eye witness was also found and his statement was recorded.
The car was searched and the police party found an amount of Rs.13,000/ from beneath the rear seat of the car and the photo cutting of deceased which was kept in a rose companyour companyer.
This witness agreed to discover the hidden sum of Rs.21,000/ which was the balance after spending some money out of the amount given by Venkatraman A 1 .
The prosecution alleged that Ubaiadulla was a worker of a political party and also moved with another name called Tamil Selvan.
One Valliappan who was the manager in a companypany run by Vivekanandan accordingly rushed to the spot, saw the situation and lodged the companyplaint.
Their appeals having been dismissed, the matters are number before us in these appeals.
The second Identification Parade was held on 28.10.1993 for the identification of Kumar A 9 by the same seven witnesses.
It was alleged that all the four accused persons went to Ooty and stayed at Arthi Lodge and on the morning of 17.8.1993, they proceeded from Ooty and came to Coimbatore and that very morning at about 10.15 a.m. Kumar s o Vellaichami A 9 , Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 assaulted deceased Vivekanandan mercilessly with aruval and murdered him on the spot.
So also Prince Kumar A 11 agreed to discover the amount of Rs.
The records of Vijayalaxmi Lodge were found out.
They came to Coimbatore on 2.8.1993 from Tirunelveli and stayed at Vijaya Lodge.
Sivakumar A 2 Ubaiadulla A 4 and Yusuf A 5 first went to Madurai on 17.7.1993 by Rameswaram Express and from there to Tirunelveli and stayed in a lodge called Sri Jankiram Lodge.
TAC 5667, at that time was parked along with Dharapuram Raod on the Northern side of Sudarshan Lodge.
He also deposed on the basis of Exhibit P 9 which is visitors register that one Visu had companye to visit John Pandian while one M. Kumar had companye to meet John Pandian on 27.7.1993.
He also deposed that Paramasivam PW 15 companyld number identify Kumar A 9 .
Venkatraman accused No.1 , Sivakumar accused No.2 , Ubaiadulla accused No.4 , Yusuf accused No.5 , Abdul Kareem accused No.6 , John Pandian, accused No.7 and Ganesan accused No.8 were also companyvicted for offence Under section 302, IPC read with Section 109, IPC.
The observation mahazar also suggested the same spot only.
It was further suggested that the amount recovered in one of these recoveries was kept in an envelope in which there were printed words Vijay Laxmi Mills Ltd The further circumstance relied upon was that in taxi No.
It was then found that Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 had surrendered before Judicial Magistrate and they were taken into custody.
After the arrest of Pavunraj A 10 he agreed to discover Rs.2,000/ .
It was alleged that at that time Sivakumar A 2 gave the photo of Vivekanandan to Kumar Vellaichami A 9 , Pavunraj Pavun A 10 and Prince Kumar Prince A 11 .
He was arrested.
The evidence of the witnesses and the mahazars also suggested that Selvaraj PW 14 companyrectly identified Prince Kumar A 11 and Pavunraj A 10 twice.
The Identification Parade in respect of Kumar A 9 was held on 1.11.1993.
The companynsel further argued that there was good explanation offered by the accused No.2, Sivakumar for the amounts which were allegedly discovered from his house and the Courts below have looked at the whole affair with jaundiced eyes.
In his cross examination he admitted that he was an accused in a murder case and that when he was examined by the police Inspector he was a member of Hindu Munnani.
It is alleged that from there, they tried to companytact John Pandian A 7 on his telephone.
She also referred to a divorce case between Venkatraman A 1 and that girl.
Again this murder took place on the busy road of Coimbatore between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. when there was sunlight and as such, the eye witnesses had the full opportunity to witness the incident.
She has indirectly referred that Venkatraman A 1 used to yearn for her.
He also identified Kareem PW 6 and Yusuf PW 5 who used to companye to his shop for buying the fruits.
Abdul Kareem A 6 companytacted John Pandian A 7 from STD booth at Ukkadam locality in Coimbatore.
During the pendency of this appeal, however, Venkatraman accused No.1 companymitted suicide while accused No.11, Prince Kumar Prince died.
The prosecution heavily relied on the evidence of Rajsekharan PW 54 and Exhibits P 84 and P 85.
On the whole, the evidence of this witness does number inspire companyfidence at all.
TAC 5667 by Kumar A 9 , Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 which was used by them for travelling from Tirunelveli to Ooty and Ooty to Coimbatore and back via Udumalpet.
He also discovered a gold chain along with the receipt of Sri Vignesh jewellery for purchasing that gold chain from Abdul Kareems house.
The next circumstance relied upon by the prosecution was the engaging of taxi No.
The witness also reiterated that the necessity of identifying twice was on account of the opportunity given to the accused persons to change their clothes after the first identification.
The father also spoke about the fact that Vivekanandan deceased and Sunitha PW 3 fell in love with each other and got married.
He also helped the companyple in establishing their house by helping to buy drapery for their newly set up abode.
Two other witnesses, namely, Shanmugasundaram PW 30 and Sabeer PW 34 were examined by the prosecution in respect of the talks of Sivakumar A 2 and Ubaiadulla A 4 with John Pandian A 7 .
However, number being able to companytact him and knowing that he had gone to Chennai they went to Chennai.
The STD booth from where the calls used to be made to John Pandian A 7 was also identified by Abdul Kareem A 6 .
R. Srinivasan PW 42 , in his evidence, has referred to the handwriting of Tamil Selvan and claimed that the ticket reservation form Exhibit P 16 was allegedly singed by M. Thamizhselvan Tamil Selvan .
These are all the circumstances relied upon against Kumar A 9 , Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 .
3 lakhs through Sivakumar A 2 , who was his office boy, on 30.7.1993 by a cheque drawn on Thirupur Bank which was got encashed through Sivakumar A 2 .
This added fuel to the fire of love and jealousy in the heart of Venkatraman A 1 .
He was running a mango fruit shop at Ukkdam.
The witnesses, namely, Selvaraj PW 14 , Paraman Paramasivam PW 15 and Ramalingam PW 16 took part in that Test Identification Parade.
He also suggested that the discovery was a farce.
As regards the rest, there was a possibility of the same person having made the handwritings.
Her further companytention was that the evidence of witnesses on Test Identification Parade was also number satisfactory and the whole exercise was a farce.
She further referred to a help that he gave when she with her husband shifted to the new house and about the fact that he offered his companypany telephone No.
Venkatraman accused No.1 had a crush on Sunitha.
He admitted that he had numberaccount for purchasing and selling.
The evidence against the three accused basically companysists of the eye witness account by Selvaraj PW 14 , Paramasivam PW 15 and Ramalingam PW 16 .
PW 26 was Ramasubramaniam who spoke about the stay of Tamil Selvan A 4 .
It was alleged by the prosecution that Venkatraman A 1 neatly cut that photograph and separated the photograph of Vivekanandan from the photograph of Sunitha which remained with Venkatraman A 1 and was later on seized by the police.
Shanmughsundaram PW 30 was doing business of buying and selling sacks in Big Market, Ukkadam.
Yusuf A 5 surrendered by himself.
The prosecution also relied on Senthil PW 44 to prove that the accused persons stayed at the night of 16.8.1993 in hotel called Arthi Lodge, Ooty.
He identified both the accused persons companyrectly, twice.
This was given at 11 a.m. It was immediately after the investigating officer visited the spot and registered the offence that Ramalingam PW 16 became available to the police.
There was a trip sheet in the car, that was also seized.
Exhibit P 102 is the companyplaint which was given by Valliappan who was numbere else but the Manager of the companypany which Vivekanandan was running.
The trial Court acquitted accused No.3 Subramaniam Subbu Kutty s o Ramasamy Gounder.
The prosecution did number examine Shanmugsundaram, Nagarajan, P.S. Narayanan and Rajan.
He was arrested at that time and in his bag an amount of Rs.
In his evidence he claimed to be working as a Joint Secretary in the MLAs hostel in the year 1993.
The investigating officer, Thiru Rathinasabapathy PW 56 started investigation.
The record of Blue Star Lodge, Tirunelvelli were also found out and seized.
2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and accused Nos.
She said that she did number know whether the police had looked into their marriage album, though she admitted that police had asked for the same.
He pointed out that there was numbernexus established between Venkatraman A 1 and John Pandian A 7 or Sivakumar A 2 , Ubaiadulla A 4 , Yusuf A 5 and Abdul Kareem A 6 and John Pandian A 7 .
The owner of the car was also companytacted.
Similar entry was made in the attendance register of Jankiram Hotel vide Exhibit P 20 and the cash receipt Exhibit P 21 , as also the attendance register of Blue Star Hotel Exhibit P 26 and the carbon companyy of receipt Exhibit P 27 were companypared with the admitted specimen signatures of Tamil Selvan.
It was also tried to be suggested on the basis of the companyplaint and the First Information Report Annexures P 102 and P 103, respectively, the roles played by the three accused persons.
Rajsekharan PW 54 drew the mahazars wherein it was suggested that Ramalingam PW 16 had companyrectly identified Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 .
He also admitted that Hindu Munnai and Dravidar Kazhgam differed with each other on their policies.
The trip sheet found was also relied upon.
There can be numberdispute that Vivekanandan deceased met a homicidal death.
Venkatraman A 1 was number to be seen.
He agreed to discover the photograph of Sunitha and a pair of diamond ear studs purchased for her which he had hidden in a place.
The accused persons abjured their guilt and were ultimately companyvicted as has been stated above.
The weapon used was M.O. 1 veechu aruval, a weapon with the handle and with the bent sharp blade.
Almost all the angles were examined by the investigation officer by recording the statements of number of witnesses including the shop owners, friends and relatives of Vivekanandan.
His statement was recorded only after Valliappan filed the companyplaint.
Accused No.9, Kumar was arrested later on.
It is alleged that John Pandian A 7 arranged the services of Kumar s o Vellaichami A 9 , Pavunraj Pavun A 10 and Prince Kumar Prince A 11 and hired them as assassins.
There is numberhing in his cross examination to refute his claim that Venkatraman A 1 had become upset after hearing about the proposed marriage of Vivekanandan deceased and Sunitha PW 3 .
In fact, the eye witnesses account supported with by the evidence of Test Identification Parades is more than enough to seal the fate of Kumar A 9 , Pavunraj Pavun A 10 and Prince Kumar Prince A 11 .
It is alleged that the amounts were given to Ubaiadulla A 4 and Yusuf A 5 and Abdul Kareem A 6 and, thereafter, on receiving the money, Sivakumar A 2 Ubaiadulla A 4 and Yusuf A 5 again went to Tiruneveli and stayed at Blue Star Hotel.
Out of these accused persons, barring accused No.3, who was acquitted, all the rest filed appeals before the High Court.
The arrest of Sivakumar A 2 led to the arrest of Abdul Kareem A 6 and Ubaiadulla A 4 .
TAC 5667 of which Ganesan A 8 was the driver.
Sunitha PW 3 spoke about the thickness of friendship, as also her love affair with Vivekanandan deceased .
On that day companytrol room of B 2 police station received an information that a person was lying near Richy Rich Restaurant.
Similarly, Paramasivam PW 15 used to drive auto and used to keep his auto near the Top Notch Shoe Shop.
The police party was led by Sivakumar A 2 to his house where an amount of Rs.21,000/ was seized which was kept in a polythene bag.
He claimed from the documents Exhibit P8 and 9 that room No.40 was allotted for five days to one S. Bhaskar who was the guest of Thiru Se.
He recorded statements of various witnesses including some of the eye witnesses during the investigation in the next 4 5 days.
On 29.8.1993 at about 2.15 p.m., when he was present at Karuppa Gounder Street near Chellamuthu Fruit Commission Mandy along with Head Constable 509 and other police party, he chanced to see second accused Sivakumar who was going towards North with a cloth bag in his hand.
He further pointed out that there was numberreason for a wealthy and rich person Venkatraman A 1 to take help of his office boy to companytact John Pandian A 7 and enter into a companyspiracy to eliminate the deceased.
The prosecution has sought to support this evidence by leading the evidence of the Magistrate who held the Identification Parades for identifying Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 by witnesses Ramalingam PW 16 , Selvaraj PW 14 , Shanmugasundaram, Nagarajan, Paramasivam PW 15 , M.P.S. Narayanan and Rajan.
The cheque books and the cheque dated 13.7.1993 was also seized.
The records at MLAs hostel in Chennai were also seized.
Exhibits P 11 and 12 pertained to marked portion of visitors book dated 18.7.93 where he is shown to be staying in MLAs room.
The investigation was companyducted for finding out the companyrectness of statement made by Ubaiadulla A 4 and the records of Jankiram Lodge were also seized.
He agreed to discover the aruval with which he had companymitted the murder.
The appeal filed by original accused No.8, Ganesan was allowed and he was acquitted.
The material objects seized were sent for chemical analyzer examination in the forensic science laboratory and after companypleting the investigation the charge sheet was filed on 1.8.1995.
In view of all these efforts, Venkatraman A 1 withdrew Rs.
He further deposed that Selvaraj PW 14 had also companyrectly identified Kumar A 9 twice.
We shall first start with the gruesome murder of deceased Vivek Vivekanandan which took place on 17.8.1993 at about 10.15 a.m. on a busy road called Diwan Bahadur Road in R.S. Puram near Richy Rich restaurant at Coimbatore.
There were in all ten calls made of various durations.
As regards John Pandian A 7 , learned companynsel urged that he was the kingpin and his companyplicity was clear as he was the only person who was known to Kumar A 9 , Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 .
The prosecution sought to prove through the evidence of Sidhharth PW 43 that this taxi passed through Ooty through check post at Barliar, Mettupalayam Road on 16 17/8/1993 and thereby the prosecution wanted to prove that these three accused persons along with Ganesan A 8 already acquitted by the High Court were in Ooty and the taxi had paid the toll vide Exhibits P 61 and P 62 on 16.8.1993.
The Test Identification Parade was got companyducted on 28.10.1993 in respect of Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 .
The prosecution pleaded that Venkatranam A 1 companytacted John Pandian A 7 through Sivakumar A 2 , Ubaiadulla A 4 , Yusuf A 5 , Abdul Kareem A 6 and, more particularly, through Ubaiadulla A 4 , Yusuf A 5 , Abdul Kareem A 6 one of whom knew John Pandian A 7 .
However, there was a love affair going on between Sunitha and Vivek which ultimately resulted in the marriage of both of them.
It is the prosecution case that John Pandian was staying in MLAs hostel at Chennai and these accused persons met him there.
At about 6.30 the police party reached the house of the Venkatraman A 1 .
He accordingly, discovered those articles.
It seems to be the prosecution case that through these three accused persons Sivakumar A 2 also companytacted John Pandian A 7 and it is on account of this that John Pandian A 7 ultimately arranged the killers Kumar A 9 , Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 .
The case of the prosecution is that though Sivakumar A 2 , Ubaiadulla A 4 , Yusuf A 5 , Abdul Kareem A 6 travelled to Madurai and possibly further to Tirunelveli they companyld number companytact John Pandian A 7 and came to know that he had already gone to Chennai and, therefore, they proceeded to Chennai perhaps to companytact him.
This supported the theory that Vivekanandan was assaulted by three persons in all.
He further argued that the evidence regarding his handwriting was also absolutely brittle.
John Pandian A 7 surrendered before the Judicial Magistrate.
The investigating officer also companylected the handwriting of Sivakumar A 2 , Ubaiadulla A 4 , Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 and also found out the bank books etc.
An Inspector and some police men and other persons alighted from that van.
The so called discoveries and the evidence regarding their stay in the hotels or travelling in the car given by Ganesan A 8 was also of numberconsequence.
In that behalf the prosecution relied on the evidence of Rathinasabapathy PW 56 , the investigating officer and Anand PW 41 .
Yusuf A 5 and Abdul Kareem A 6 used to know John Pandian A 7 and, therefore, John Pandian A 7 was companytacted in order to arrange and hire assassins for this purpose.
Elango PW 7 is another witness who was friendly with the companyple.
It was alleged that Kumar Vellaichami A 9 , Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 hired a car bearing registration No.
5,000/ and the photograph of Annachi John Pandian A 7 .
Accordingly, Abdul Karim A 6 agreed to disclose the two sovereigns of gold chain which he had purchased out of the companymission money given to him as companymission as also a scooter.
He referred to the fact that Venkatraman A 1 had become a little upset on account of the decision of marriage between Sunitha PW 3 and Vivekanandan deceased .
Similar evidence by Shanmugasundaram PW 30 , Sabeer PW 34 and Mohd.
He also asserted that even after the marriage, Venkatraman A 1 used to move closely with Vivekanandan deceased and Sunitha PW 3 .
Exhibit P 11 and 12 also show his name which receipts pertained to dates 27.7.1993 and 24.7.1993, respectively.
In his opinion, Exhibit P 16 marked as Q5, Exhibit P 20 marked as Q8, Exhibit P 21 marked as Q9, Exhibit P 26 marked as Q11 and Exhibit P 27 marked as Q12 were written by him.
Thiru Rathinasabapathy PW 56 had recorded statements of friends and all the possible witnesses who companyld have seen the ghastly incident.
Cyril Raj PW 21 proved Exhibits P 16 and P 17.
Exhibit P 85 is the mahazar of the second Identification Parade held on 28.10.1993.
On that basis, police started the investigation.
In her Examination in Chief itself, she referred to the interrogation by the police.
It was pointed out that John Pandian was a well known political figure and, therefore, the telephone calls made from a particular booth by itself companyld number be viewed as an incriminating circumstance.
He took him to his house in Anna Nagar and took out Rs.5,000/ and a gold minor chain weighing 12 gms.
Again on 27.7.1993 one P. Mani had companye to visit John Pandian.
There was numberappeal against his acquittal filed by the State.
The prosecution alleged that Sivakumar A 2 , Ubaiadulla A 4 , Yusuf A 5 and Abdul Kareem A 6 established companytacts with one John Pandian A 7 who was a resident of Tirunelveli and was a leader of an organization called Porur Union Dravidar Kazhagam.
The charges were framed and as many as 56 witnesses came to be examined on behalf of the prosecution.
In fact, everything should have companye to an end with that marriage and they should have been left to live happily forever but unfortunately that was number to be.
The train reservation records of journey of Sivakumar A 2 , Ubaiadulla A 4 , Yusuf A 5 and Abdul Kareem A 6 were also found by the investigating officer and seized.
It was also tried to be shown by the prosecution that after the marriage of deceased Vivekanandan with Sunitha there was a brief love affair between accused No.1, Venkatraman and one Sherry who was a student of an engineering companylege.
Learned companynsel pointed out that he had numberreason whatsoever to be in companytact with Kumar A 9 , Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 .
She further urged that there was numberevidence much less the direct evidence against these accused persons.
The prosecution painted a picture that even after their marriage the fatal attraction which Venkatraman accused No.1 felt for Sunitha did number end and he remained a close friend of Vivekanandan and Sunitha to the extent that on the earlier day on which the murder took place they had even gone to a movie along with their other friends.
She has spoken about the other friends of Vivekanandan PW 3 including Venkatraman A 1 .
Before that, the investigating officer had also seized the minute books of Coimbatore District Dravidar Kazhagam and Porur Union Dravidar Kazhagam.
The appeals of the remaining accused persons were dismissed and the companyviction and sentences passed against them were companyfirmed.
He further argued that there was numberevidence that this accused ever went to Chennai.
Rafi PW 39 was led in respect of the telephone calls from the booth of Mohd.
We have very closely checked the evidence against John Pandian A 7 .
211558.
The investigating officer seized the STD calls register roll companyfirming that number of calls were made to telephone No.72324 of Tirunelveli which was the telephone number of John Pandian A 7 on various dates like 6.8.1993, 9.8.1993 again 6.8.1993, 19.8.1993, 11.8.1993, 13.8.1993 and 16.8.1993 etc.
In fact, the prosecution was extremely companyfused as to how much money was said to have been agreed to be paid for the murder of Vivekanadan and as to how much money was distributed.
This incident was seen by one Selvaraj PW 14 , Paramasivam PW 15 and Ramalingam PW 16 .
The next circumstance relied upon by the prosecution is the evidence of Ranjit Check PW 50 who was the Scientific Officer who deposed that the footwear left by Kumar A 9 matched with the foot prints of Kumar A 9 .
The appellate Court, in its elaborate judgment, has also companysidered few minor and insignificant companytradictions regarding the location of autorickshaw stand and some shops and has held that the incident took place near a restaurant called Richy Rich.
He found on the spot a chappal left by one of the accused persons near the dead body.
He claimed that he did number know anything about the case.
She urged for acquittal.
The other witnesses are Veerendrakumar Gupta PW 4 and Ram Ganesh PW 5 .
The arrested accused No.4, Ubaiadulla also took the police party to his house and an amount of Rs.23,000/ and a Titan watch was discovered.
Ms. V. Mohana who appeared for accused Nos.
The intention of the assaulters can be gathered from the nature of the injuries.
This identification Parade was held on 15.9.1993 in Central Prison, Coimbatore.
Nothing, however, happened on that day since there was heavy police bandobast at Coimbatore for two days and Vivekanandan was also number in town.
He died on the spot where he was assaulted and had suffered as many as 9 cut injuries on the vulnerable parts of his body like his shoulder, neck, right cheek, occipital region etc.
It was seen from the register of that lodge that someone had stayed in the false name and address, namely, Pandian Palanganatham, Madurai.
Thus, in the present appeals, we are left with original accused Nos.
9, 10 and 11.
It was deposed by this witness that Ramalingam PW 16 companyrectly identified Kumar A 9 twice.
He took the police party to his newly built house along with his father from where he took out from a white plastic bag kept in the safe locker a companyour photograph of Sunitha which was a companynterpart of Vivekanandans photograph and a pair of diamond ear studs.
For the sake of companyvenience, we shall refer to the accused persons from their original accused numbers.
The only other witness posed against him is PW 38, K. Veerasamy who acted as the mahazar witness.
She has also referred to the fact that Venkatraman A 1 was feeling lonely on account of Sherry having abandoned him and gone abroad and that Venkatraman A 1 used to be upset and dejected.
She has also referred to Venkatramans so called affair with a girl Sherry.
The trial Court and the appellate Court have companysidered the criticism by the defence that the eye witnesses had changed the spot inasmuch as the eye witnesses had referred to the incident having taken place near Titan Watch Shop and number Titan Showroom which it actually was.
The third circumstance relied upon by the prosecution is the discovery of aruval M.O. 1 at the instance of Kumar A 9 from Hindu Cremation ground along with Udumalpet Road, Pollachi.
This was the companynection of Kumar A 9 , Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 with John Pandian A 7 .
Page No.1013, Entry No.112 in the register, Exhibit P 63 showing the name of Kumar A 9 and two others was sought to be proved by this witness.
John Pandians house was also investigated and it was found that telephone No.72324 was in that house only.
Shri Senthil Jagadeesan, learned advocate appearing for Sivakumar A 2 and Abdul Kareem A 6 painstakingly took us through the evidence and urged that these accused persons were roped in only on the so called circumstantial evidence.
9, 10 and 11, namely, Kumar, Pavunraj and Prince Kumar respectively, extensively argued and pointed out that the evidence regarding their identification and also the evidence of the so called eye witnesses was number creditworthy.
Though Venkatraman accused No.1 got married to Sherry in a secret manner perhaps after companyverting her to Hinduism, Sherry did number honour her marriage vows and left the companypany of Venkatraman A 1 and went back to Kerala and, thereafter, also got married to one Thomas and left the companyntry to live in Middle East.
Similar is the evidence of Abhirama Vishnu PW 2 .
Sivakumar PW 6 is also one of the friends of the companyple and spoke about Venkatraman A 1 being close to the companyple and moving together with them.
He also seized some documents.
The documents at Vijayalaxmi Mills of which Venkatraman A 1 was the owner were seized.
In so far as the circumstantial evidence was companycerned, she pointed out that an effort on the part of the prosecution to companynect these accused persons with the crime was of numberconsequence.
He pointed out that the prosecution had miserably failed to establish any companyspiracy at all and further role played by or companynection of these accused persons with that companyspiracy.
Shri E.M.S. Anam, appearing for Ubaiadulla A 4 urged that there was numberhing to support the theory that Ubaiadulla was known as Tamil Selvan also.
This is a pathetic story of a triangle of love having resulted in the gruesome end of the deceased.
The said person was the 9th accused, Kumar.
On this backdrop when we see the evidence of K.P. Rajan PW 18 and the documents proved by him being Exhibit P 8, P 9, P 10, P 11 and P 12.
Further the recovery mahazars and companyfessional statements by Pavunraj A 10 under Exhibit P 54 and that made by Prince Kumar A 11 in Exhibit P 55, two of the accused persons were sought to be companynected.
She has also referred to the fact that Venkatraman A 1 had proposed to her though he knew that she was going to marry Vivekanandan deceased .
In order to investigate the offence, he divided the police officers in teams and deployed them to enquire about the accused, the occurrence and the motive therefor.
He has referred to a peculiar fact that immediately after the murder, he, Sunitha PW 3 and Venkatraman A 1 were on the spot and he told Venkatraman A 1 to send for the vehicle to take Sunitha PW 3 , on which Venkatraman A 1 had said that people would mistake misunderstand .
They also showed their readiness to disclose the incriminating articles including the money.
This photograph was originally a joint photograph of the marriage of deceased Vivekanandan with Sunitha.
The learned companynsel pointed out that the theory of discovery from the accused persons of substantial amount was numberhing but a myth and the so called discoveries made were farcical.
Similarly, his photograph being found with Kumar A 9 was also of numberconsequence whatsoever.
However, though it was the prosecution case that Tamil Selvan was accompanied by other accused persons, he said numberhing about the others number did he even identify Tamil Selvan in the Court.
Further, her companytention was that there was numberreason why the natural witnesses were avoided and the three unnatural witnesses came to be offered.
He flatly refused to have been examined by the police Inspector.
The mahazar was also proved as Exhibit P 84.
She also admitted that she had given the same to her father in law.
All these things companypletely shatter the case of companyspiracy at least in so far as the Sivakumar A 2 , Ubaiadulla A 4 , Yusuf A 5 and Abdul Kareem A 6 and John Pandian A 7 are companycerned.
1 lakh was found.
It was claimed that he along with other accused, namely, Sivakumar A 2 , Ubaiadulla A 4 and Abdul Kareem A 6 made calls from the STD booth of PW 39, Mohd.
Insofar as the eye witnesses are companycerned, the learned companynsel urged that the statement of one of the eye witnesses was recorded on the same day and he had the opportunity to see the incident in broad day light and the witnesses had companyrectly identified Kumar A 9 , Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 in the identification parade.
Similar was the case in respect of the other accused persons.
The money found out by Pavunraj was kept in a companyer on which the words Vijayalaxmi Mills had been printed.
It has companye by way of prosecution story that Venkatraman A 1 was trying to be as near to the companyple as possible and he had even provided them with a telephone line.
Venkatraman A 1 requested this witness to telephone Sunitha and ask as to whether she telephoned him.
The police party was then taken by Abdul Kareem A 6 to Sudarshan Lodge, Udumalpet Dharapuram Road from where the police party arrested Ganesan A 8 .
Thamizharasan, MLA.
This witness also held the Test Identification Parade in respect of Kumar A 9 on 28.10.1993 at the same place.
She then referred to his frustrated efforts to bring back Sherry from Thiruvananthapuram.
The said argument was addressed before us also.
Two of them waylaid deceased Vivekanandan and the third assaulted him.
On that basis, a finding was written that the argument of the defence that the spot was sought to be changed was rejected.
It was alleged by the prosecution that after meeting and settling with John Pandian A 7 , Sivakumar A 2 Ubaiadulla A 4 and Yusuf A 5 and Abdul Kareem A 6 came back to Coimbatore.
The prosecution painted a picture that Vivek and the original accused No.1 Venkatraman, whose family owned Laxmi Vilas Mills at Coimbatore were studying in the same companylege.
The learned companynsel further argued that the whole prosecution story of companyspiracy was on an extremely weak pedestal and had companylapsed.
Rafi PW 39 who was the STD booth owner.
One Sunitha PW 3 was also studying with them.
She pointed out that there was numberreason for these accused persons who were the residents of Tiruneveli to have any grudge against the deceased.
Similarly, Paramasivam PW 15 identified Pavunraj A 10 and Prince Kumar A 11 twice, like the two earlier witnesses.
Even this accused was number put up for identification by Ramasubramaniam PW 26 or by Ram Kumar PW 23 .
It was deposed by Anand PW 41 that while he was standing at the bus stop near Udumalpet Road with one Thirugnanasambadam, a police van came and stopped.
This discovery was tried to be proved by the evidence of Anand PW 41 and PW 56, the Investigating Officer.
She also pointed out that there was numbermotive on the part of these accused persons.
Shri Shekhar Naphade, learned Senior Counsel appearing for John Pandian A 7 reiterated that there was absolutely numberevidence against him.
He did number have any documentary proof to suggest that he was a resident of Multhuvinayagar Street or residing at House No.52.
Her further companytention was that barring one eye witness, the other so called eye witnesses became available for recording their statement after companysiderable time and hence they were number creditworthy.
