When the accused attempted to inflict injuries on PW 1, he warded off the same which resulted in an injury to his forehand.
PW 10, in her evidence, stated that the four knives marked in the case companyld have caused the injuries sustained by deceased as well as by other injured persons.
While three of the accused held the deceased Sayeeda, A 1 stated to have cut her throat which resulted in her instantaneous death.
The accused Appellants were arrested on 26.10.1996 at 7 p.m. i.e. on the date of occurrence.
PW 2 suffered one cut injury on the back apart from one abrasion.
PW 8 was the doctor who examined the injured eye witnesses PWs 1 to 4 and Exhibits P 6, P 7, P 8 and P 9 were the certificates issued by PW 8.
The accused, who were held by the neighbours, were beaten by the public and were shifted to the hospital by the police personnel.
PW 1 stated to have worked as Imam in some mosque in Koothanallur before setting up his residence in Nagur.
PW 32, the doctor examined the accused on 27.10.1996 at 4.35 p.m. Exhibits P 40, 41, 42 and 39 were the certificates issued by PW 32 relating to injuries sustained by A 1 to A 4, respectively.
When PWs 2 and 3 tried to intervene, they were also inflicted with knife injuries.
Exhibit P 30 disclosed the blood group of deceased as O group.
At the instance of PW 23, a report appeared about the nefarious activities in a magazine called Yevukanai.
O.6 was the blood stained cement flooring while M.O.7 was the cement flooring without blood stain.
When PW 4, the mother of the deceased came for her rescue, she was inflicted with stab injuries in which process her right hand ring finger got severed.
In view of the milieu created, people living in and around the place of residence of PW 1, gathered around and caught hold of all the four accused Appellants.
2 to 5 were the knives.
In the trial Court, the prosecution examined as many as 34 witnesses apart from marking Exhibits P 1 to P 42.
Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the prosecution was that PW 1 by name Alim George was a resident of Kaliba Sahib Street in Nagur Town.
M.Os.1 to 11 the material objects were also placed before the Court.
The Division Bench by the impugned judgment dated 23.07.2008 in Criminal Appeal No.359 of 2005 companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence imposed by the learned Sessions Judge in the judgment dated 06.04.2005 in SC No.240 of 2003.
M.Os.7 to 11 were the dress worn by the deceased Sayeeda.
It is in the above stated background that the Appellants were arrested along with the other two accused and after recording the statements of witnesses, the charge sheet came to be filed.
It is stated that when PW 1 along with the other residents was in his house on 26.10.1996 at 4.00 p.m., the door of the house was pushed open by the Appellants accused holding knives in their hands, they entered the house and asked for PW 1 by calling who was George and one of the accused placed a knife on the neck of PW 3 while another accused pulled the deceased Sayeeda by her hair and yet another person advanced towards PW 1 while another accused extorted to kill him.
It was recorded by PW 32 to the effect that the accused Appellants informed PW 32 that they were beaten up by the public.
The trial Court reached the companyclusion that all the charges framed against A 5 and A 6 were number proved beyond all reasonable doubts and, therefore, they were acquitted.
The deceased and the injured were shifted to the hospital where PW 1s statement Exhibit P 5 was recorded which was registered as Crime No.464 of 1996 at 6.30 p.m. at Nagur Police Station under Sections 147, 148, 452, 324, 307 and 302, IPC and the express report was forwarded to the Judicial Magistrate at Nagapattinam and was delivered at 00.10 hours.
PW 10 was the post mortem doctor and Exhibit P 15 is the post mortem certificate.
It also revealed that the blood found in one of the knives was disintegrated.
At that point of time while deceased Sayeeda raised an alarm, the accused persons caught hold of her hands and legs and inflicted multiple injuries on her.
M.Os.2 to 5 were the knives which were used in the crime.
He was living with his three wives by name Fatima, Sayeeda deceased and Sameema and their mothers, his daughter Jeni, his son Jaffer Hussain, Rahana sister of his deceased wife Sayeeda, one of his friends by name Goodnameshah PW 2 and his nephew Niyaz Ahmad PW 3 were also living along with him.
By the impugned judgment the Division Bench of the High Court having companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court the Appellants are before us.
Exhibit P 29 is the FSL report companyfirming presence of blood in seven items.
He also stated to have worked as Principal in the Melapalayam Arabic companylege.
Apart from PWs 1 to 4, the injured eye witnesses related to the deceased, an independent witness PW 5 who was employed on that day for changing the tiles of the roof of the house of PW 1 was also examined.
According to the prosecution, the said report provoked the accused along with three others, two of whom were also prosecuted before the trial Court which resulted in their involvement in the present crime alleged against them.
There were certain allegations against PW 1 to the effect that he was indulging in certain nefarious activities, namely, exploiting women folk by drugging them and also thereafter blackmailing them.
PW 1 suffered one grievous injury which is a cut injury at left forearm.
FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J. In these appeals preferred by Accused Nos.1 to 4 hereinafter referred to as A 1, A 2, A 3 and A 4 , the Appellants herein seek to challenge the judgment passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Madras.
PW 4 suffered six cut injuries, of which injury Nos.1 to 3 were simple and injury Nos.4 to 6 were grievous.
PW 3 suffered two simple injuries.
