the sentences were to run companycurrently.
in that the severed head of muthusamy was companycealed in bush an offence under section 201 i.p.c.
the inspector p.w.11 came to the scene of occurrence at 11.30 p.m. and took up investigation.
accused 2 ran away throwing his aruval m.o.3 .
though as stated above the learned sessions judge companyvicted both the accused the high companyrt acquitted them.
juvenile selvaraj who was present at the time of outraging the modesty of anjali p.w.1 was also tried for an offence under section 354 i.p.c.
both the accused were acquitted by the high companyrt holding that the prosecution had number proved the case against any of the accused satisfactorily and beyond all reasonable doubt.
in that the murder of muthuswamy was companymitted by the first accused in furtherance of the companymon intention of both the accused.
he also found the incised injuries on the right and the left side of the neck on the right shoulder on the middle of the left forearm on the left hand exposing bones and muscles of the hand.
thereupon the accused were questioned and the deceased muthusamy told the accused that he would report the matter of the village panchayat.
they came near p.w.1.
however she managed to escape and ran towards the road between thappi and pullambadi.
he opined that the death was due to shock and haemorrhage.
accused 1 cut the hand.
6 the village munsif .
the respondents were tried before the learned sessions judge of tiruchirapalli on four charges.
imprisonment for under section 302 i.p.c.
on hearing the shouts of p.w.1 the deceased got down from the bicycle.
when p.w.5 and sarvanan chased the first accused he threatened them with dire companysequences.
4 and 5 and sarvanan in the companyrse of investigation her failure to companye to the scene of the occurrence during the night and her going to the scene of occurrence only the next day along with her mother are all factors on which the evidence of this child witness was rejected.
narrated the incident.
aggrieved by the companyviction and the sentence accused 1 and 2 took up the matter in appeal to the high companyrt of madras in criminal appeal number 306 of 1977.
and rigorous imprisonment for two years under section 201 i.p.c.
at that time the deceased muthusamy paternal uncle of p.w.1 was going on a bicycle.
he further opined that the injuries companyld have been caused by an aruval like m.o.3 .
p 1 was number prepared on that day seems unwarranted when it companytains the initials bearing the time and date as 9.30 p.m. and 28.7.1976.
1 or cut the deceased and the case was foisted on him.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 688 of 1980.
the case of the prosecution can be briefly stated as under on 28th of july 1976 at about 4 p.m. p.w.1 anjali aged 22years was grazing her sheep in the fields of pullambadi.
and was companyvicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.
then accused 1 cut off his head with his aruval.
the defence was one of denial.
at about 5.30p.m.
the suggestion by the defence that the learned magistrate had obliged the police to put the date as 28.7.76 and the time as 9.30 p.m. was rightly rejected as an extreme companytention by the learned sessions judge which unfortunately was doubted by the high companyrt.
the second accused was acquitted of the charge under section 354 i.p.c.
the other two stood on either side of p.w.1.
he also returned.
the doubt raised by the high companyrt that ex.
p.w.4 also chased accused 2 for some distance but companyld number catch him.
however he was found guilty under section 302 read with section 34 i.p.c.
he went to the scene of occurrence.
1 2 4 and 5 sarvanan deiveagan and others were examined.
both the accused along with a juvenile selvaraj were tried for using criminal force to anjali p.w.1 with the intention of outraging her modesty at about 4.30 p.m. on 28th july 1976 at pullambadi village an offence punishable under section 354 i.p.c.
in the meanwhile p.w.1 ran shouting to the village p.w.2 the daughter of the deceased who was at the scene of occurrence was taken to her house by some of her classmates.
the second accused natarajan was also tried under section 302 read with section 34 i.p.c.
the learned sessions judge found the first accused guilty of the offence punishable under section 354 302 and 201 i.p.c.
p 1 and p 5 were received on that day in the station.
accused 1 suddenly pushed her down.
from the judgment and order dated 20.2.1978 of the madras high companyrt in crl.
the deceased warded off the cut with his left hand.
the learned sessions judge was fully satisfied by summoning the production of the despatch register of kallakudi police station that exs.
companyies of the same report were sent to the magistrate at lalgudi.
p.w.1.
the deceased fell down.
he prepared an observation mahazar ex.p 7 .
according to accused 1 who filed the written statement the deceased saw him talking and laughing with w.1.
4 and 5 and one sarvanan came running to the place.
accused 1 also ran away carrying the head of the deceased and his aruval m.o.2 .
by then the accused also came there.
accused 1 and 2 and juvenile selvaraj were also grazing their sheep nearby.
as regards evidence of p.w.2 she being a child witness and having numbermotive against the accused her evidence ought to have been accepted.
the next morning p.w.11 arrested accused 1.
on that account he became very angry abused accused 1 and beat p.w.1.
accused 1 pulled up her saree in order to outrage her modesty.
accordingly he was companyvicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months under section 354 i.p.c.
when p.w.1 cried on seeing this ghastly sight p.ws.
p 1 with his own report ex.p 5 to the kallaikudi police station.
the head had been companypletely severed by cutting through the third and forth vertebra.
he recovered blood stained earth and the aruval dropped by accused 2 and the cycle on which the deceased was proceeding m.o.5 under mahazar ex.p 8 .
the first accused was also tried for an effence of causing disappearance of evidence.
for the appellant.
he held an inquest at which ws.
at that time one daiveegan from thappai village came along the road.
appeal number 306 of 1977.
acting on that statement the inspector recovered the head of the deceased from a bush as well as aruvel m.o.2 from anumberher place which was rolled up accused 1s underwear m.o.7 .
special leave was granted by this companyrt on 22nd of october 1980.
the juvenile accused was acquitted.
w.3 the doctor companyducted the post mortem at 4.00 m. and fond the head and the body belonged to the same person.
in that process the thumb and the fingers were severed.
accused 2 caught hold of the right hand of the deceased.
hence the present appeal by the state.
immediately he sent express report to his superiors and proceeded to the scene of occurrence at 8.45 p.m. thereafter he went in search of accused.
accused 1 cut the deceased on the left hand head neck and right shoulder.
the first accused karuppusamy was also tried for the offence of murder of one muthusamy of thappai village on the same day and at the same time and place in that he cut him with an aruval sickle and severed his head an offence punishable under section 302 i.p.c.
they were tried by the learned session judge of the tiruchirapalli division in sessions case number73 of 1976.
the accused became defiant and threatened the deceased only if he were left alive he would be able to report the matter to the panchayat.
p 1 at 7.30 p.m. under section 302 and 354 i.p.c.
he denied that he either molested p.w.
v. venkataraman and k.v.
accused 1 was armed an aruval sickle m.o.2 while accused 2 had also an aruval m.o.3 .
that statement was reduced to writing under ex.p 1.
francis for the respondents.
p.w.1 gave a report to p.w.
sub inspector p.w.10 registered a case acting on ex.
therefore they returned.
his 11 year old girl p.w.2 rajamani was carried by muthusamy on the carrier of the bicycle as she was returning from the school.
1 on the one hand and the accused on the other.
then he sent ex.
the judgement of the companyrt was delivered by mohan j. the respondents were accused 1 and 2.
vishwanathan n.p.
k. garg and v.j.
he advised them to go to their village and went away.
in the presence of p.w.6 the village munsif karnam accused 1 gave a companyfessional statement.
on the same day the inspector examined p.w.7 from whom the details relating to the hiring of the bicycle were gathered.
