The High Court acquitted Partheeban accused No.3 of all the charges.
Accused No.1 and 3 chased PW 3 and accused No.2 assaulted and inflicted cut injuries on the head of PW 3.
The appellants were number armed and admittedly they are said to have removed sticks from the bullock cart standing nearby and on the exhortation by accused No.1 Giri, the appellants have attacked Ramesh.
Based on the companyplaint lodged by PW 1, a case was registered against the accused in Crime No.152/1997 under Sections 147, 148, 307 read with Section 149 IPC.
The witnesses ran away from the place and came back only after some time and they were informed that injured Ramesh was removed from the scene of occurrence by a police companystable.
Learned companynsel for the appellants companytended that the testimony of PW 2 who is an injured witness is number believable as firstly all the injured witnesses were examined soon after the incident in Government Hospital and they deposed that they were assaulted by unknown persons.
4 and 5 took the wooden stick from a bullock cart standing nearby.
In the forenoon, on the day of the incident i.e. on 18.05.1997, Kannan PW2, Ramesh deceased and one Kamalakannan went to the accused in order to settle the dispute amicably.
No doubt, companymon intention companyld develop even at the spur of the moment but in the present case, the way the occurrence took place as depicted by the prosecution, there companyld number have been companymon intention between the accused.
Though the appellants denied their presence at the place of incident and pleaded that a false case has been foisted against them, companysistent version of PWs 1 and 5 establish presence of the appellants and that they attacked Ramesh with sticks.
To substantiate the charges, onbehalf of the prosecution, fifteen witnesses were examined.
We have carefully companysidered the rival companytention and perused the impugned judgment and material on record.
On the mid way, the accused persons were informed that their friend one Anand is being badly cut by the companyplainant party and the accused questioned them as to how they companyld attack their man even when settlement talks were going on.
3 to 5 attacked Ramesh on his face by stick and Ramesh fell down on the road.
They also inflicted cut injury on Muruganathan PW4, who was taking bath near a water tap.
Ramesh and other injured witnesses were examined by PW 11 Dr. Baskaran in General Hospital, Pondicherry.
Initially settlement talks were on and fight started only when the accused party was informed by their person that Anand was cut by companyplainant party and thus the incident arose suddenly.
When PW 2 intervened to save Ramesh, PW 2 was attacked and he sustained injury on his left hand and PW 2 ran away from the place.
On the evening at about 6.30 P.M., PW2 Kannan, PW3 Saravanan, PW5 Suresh, Arumugam and Nagarajan went to Sakthi Nagar and resumed settlement talks.
So far as the overt act of the appellants, PW2 Kannan stated that Accused No.
The appellants and Partheeban Accused No.3 have also attacked Ramesh with sticks on his face.
On hearing the same, Giri Accused No.1 and Seenu Accused No.2 questioned the companyplainant party as to how they companyld attack their man even when settlement talks were going on and so saying accused No.1 and 2 took their knives which they were hiding behind their back and accused No.
PW2 Kannan, injured witness stated that accused No.1 Giri and accused No.2 Seenu attacked Ramesh by knives on his head.
At that time Ramesh and his uncle PW 1 Murgan were companying in the opposite direction and on seeing them accused No.1 Giri pointing out to Ramesh, exhorted others saying that Ramesh belonged to Kannan party and that he be cut and by so saying accused No.1 Giri cut Ramesh on his head with knife and Seenu Accused No.2 also attacked Ramesh with knife.
Partheeban and appellants beat Ramesh on the face with sticks, Giri accused No.1 again cut Ramesh with knife and Ramesh fell down.
PW 3 Saravanan, PW 4 Muruganathan nephew of accused No.3 did number support the prosecution case and prosecution thus relied upon the evidence of PW1 Murgan and PW5 Suresh and injured witness PW2 Kannan.
Briefly stated case of the prosecution is that one Natarajan had a quarrel with Seenu Srinivasan accused No.2 in respect of a chit transaction and Kannan PW2 supported Natarajan and fight ensued between Seenu accused No.2 and Kannan PW2 about a week prior to the date of incident i.e. 18.05.1997.
So saying, the accused ran towards the place and on seeing PW 1 and Ramesh companying in the opposite direction, Giri accused No.1 allegedly shouted that Ramesh supports Kannan and that he must be killed and accused No.1 and 2 cut Ramesh with knives on his head and chased him.
After due investigation, chargesheet was filed against all the five accused.
Vide impugned judgment dated 15.07.2005, High Court modified the companyviction as aforesaid in para 1 and partly allowed the criminal appeal.
However, PW 2, who was examined after three days, has stated that he was assaulted by accused No.1 Giri and number attributed any overt act to the appellants accused No.4 and 5.
The trial companyrt held that the prosecution has established guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and companyvicted all the five accused under Section 148 IPC and Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and various other offences and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and also imposed sentences for other offences.
3 to 5 took sticks from a cart standing nearby attacked PWs 2, 3 and 5.
PW 2 did number say anything about the overt act of the appellants.
Suresh PW5 had also stated that the appellants attacked Ramesh by stick.
On the evening at about 6.30 P.M., Kannan PW2, Saravanan PW3, Suresh PW5 and Arumugam PW6 accompanied by Nagarajan went to Sakthi Nagar at Uruliyanpet and were having the settlement talks with the accused.
At that time, one person belonging to the accused party came and informed that at the companyner of lane, Anand friend of the accused party was cut by the person who came for the settlement talks.
Presence of the appellants and that they were armed with sticks is also substantiated by the evidence of injured witness Kannan PW2.
Aggrieved, the appellants have preferred this appeal.
Prosecution has examined fifteen witnesses out of which PWs 2 to 4 are injured witnesses.
Aggrieved by the verdict of companyviction, accused preferred appeal before the High Court.
Thereafter both parties left the place stating that they companyld resume settlement talks in the evening.
BANUMATHI, J. This criminal appeal is filed against the judgment dated 15.07.2005 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal No.113 of 1999, whereby the High Court, while maintaining the sentence, modified the companyviction recorded by the trial companyrt qua the accused namely Giri accused No.1, Seenu Srinivasan accused No.2, Balu Bala Subramaniam Appellant No.1 Accused No.4 and Raja Kotti Raja Appellant No.2 Accused No.5 as companyviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC.
However, during settlement talks, fight ensued between PW 2 and Seenu and Balu attempted to beat PW 2 and Ramesh intervened and beat Balu.
