Reliance was also placed on the evidence of PW 6 the doctor who had examined PW 1 Kandaswamy and also companyducted the autopsy on the dead body of Jayaraman.
High Court and by a companymon judgment the High Court companyfirmed the companyviction of A 1 under Section 302 I.P.C. but modified the sentence of death to imprisonment for life.
P.C. to the High Court for companyfirmation of the sentence of death awarded to A1.
The Sessions Judge found all the charges proved against A1, A2 and A3 and accordingly companyvicted them He imposed a sentence Of death on A 1 and a sentence of 8 years RI on A2 and A3 for the offence of murder of Jayaraman.
The three accused were arrested and their weapons were seized.
The plea of all the three accused was one of total denial of their companyplicity in the alleged offences.
PW 6 Dr. Devarajan examined the injury on PW 1 and also performed the autopsy on the dead body of Jayaraman and he certified that PW 1 and Jayaraman would have sustained the injuries on their person due to being attacked with bill hooks and that Jayaramans death was on account of shock and haemorrhage resulting from the injuries sustained by him.
Thereafter they went along the Bazar street accompanied by PW 2.
The attack began with A 1 inflicting an incised injury 16 cms.
The Sessions Judge accepted the prosecution case and awarded companyvictions and sentences to the three accused in the manner set but above.
As regards A 2 and A 3, the companyviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. was companyfirmed and they were sentenced to imprisonment for life.
PW 15 Nambiar Inspector of Police promptly proceeded to the scene of occurrence and held inquest over the dead body of Jayaraman.
8 78, Jayaraman and PW 1 bound themselves over to appear in Court on that day and left the Court premises.
40 of 1978 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai.
All these matters were heard together by the Judgment dated March 8, 1989 in Criminal Appeal No.
The Sessions Judge made a reference under Section 366 Cr.
At about 11.45 A.M. when they were near the shop of PW 3 Selladurai they were attacked by the accused in order to avenge the murder of Dakshinamurthy.
The prosecution case was that on 23.
Case was registered and investigated into and thereafter a charge sheet was laid against deceased Jayaraman and PW 1 Kndaswamy, both of them being drivers of a tourist bus.
All the three accused preferred appeals to the High Court against their companyvictions and sentences.
3 in Sessions Case No.
The attack on Jayaraman was followed by A 2 inflicting a semi circular incised wound 5 cms.
60 of 1983.
In companynection with that case deceased Jayaraman and PW 1 Kandaswamy, who were on bail, appeared at the Court of of the Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi at 11 A.M. on 16.
As the companymittal enquiry was adjourned to 30.
under Section 307 I.P.C. was modified to one under Section 324 I.P.C. and companysequently the companyviction of A 1 and A 3 under Section 307 read with Section 34 I.P.C. was also modified to one under Section 324 read with Section 34 I.P.C. The companyviction of A 3 under Section 307 was modified to one under Section 506 Part II I.P.C. and companysequently the companyviction of A 1 and A 3 under Section 307 read with Section 34 I.P.C. was also modified to one under Section 506 Part II I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. By reason of the altered companyvictions the sentences were also modified but for the purpose of this appeal it is enough if we refer to the modified sentences awarded to A 3, the appellant herein.
After sending the dead body to the hospital for postmortem examination, PW 12 returned to the Police Station.
78 the eldest brother of A 1 by name Dakshinamurthy had been done to death in the companyrse of a quarrel between him and two bus drivers and a report was made to the police about his murder by another brother by name Ghanapanditham.
They were accompanied by PW 2 Mani, a friend of Jayaraman.
The prosecution case was that an occurrence took place at about 11.45 A.M. on 16.8.1973 in the Big Bazar Street in Aranthangi town in which one Jayaraman was murdered by A 1, PW 1 Kandaswamy was attempted to be murdered by A 2 and PW 2 Mani was attempted to be murdered by A 3.
For the companyvictions under Section 324 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and Section 506 Part II I.P.C. he was sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years and 2 years respectively, the sentences to run companycurrently with the imprisonment for life awarded under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. While A 1 and A 2 do number appear to have preferred appeals to this Court, A 3 alone has preferred this appeal to assail the companyvictions and sentences awarded to him.
x 0.5 cm.
Besides, the prosecution also relied upon the evidence of PW 12 regarding the surrender of A 1 to A 3 at the Police Station within hours after the occurrence and the handing over of their weapons by them.
Soon after his return, A 1 to A 3 appeared before him and surrendered themselves and produced their respective bill hooks.
PW 1 went to the Police Station forthwith and gave a report Exhibit P 1 to PW 11 the Sub Inspector of Police and on the basis of it, a case was registered against A 1 to A 3.
Natrajan, J. This appeal by special leave has been preferred by accused No.
The High Court initiated a suo moto revision against A 2 and A 3 for enhancement of the sentence for their companyviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. since the Sessions Judge had wrongly awarded them a sentence of 8 years R.I. only.
As regards the charges pertaining to the attempted murder of PW 1 Kandaswamy and PW 2 Mani, the High Court altered the Sections of offence and the sentences therefor in the manner already set out above.
In respect of these offences, each of the three accused was directly charged for his overt act and companystructively charged for the overt acts of the other accused.
The companyviction of A 2.
