Madrasreserved High Court · 2025

Crl.A.No.578 of 20222.4. PW6 – Nagaraj deposed that he is running an auto. He heard that the deceased was lying down near the school gate. PW13 – Vinoth also deposed that he is working as Ambulance Driver and police enquired him.2.5. PW14 – Dr.S.Murali deposed that on 19.04.2013 at about 10.00 p.m., while he was in duty along with one Dr.Muthukrishnan, one person has come to the hospital with injuries in his hand. One Chandrasekar has come to the said hospital with injury in his hand. On enquiry, he informed that while cutting fruits he sustained torn injury on his right hand palm, for which the said Dr.Muthukrishnan made stitches.2.6. PW15- K.Soundararajan – Village Administrative Officer deposed that police requested him to be a witness in one case. On 10.07.2011, he went to Vellore North Police Station along with his assistant Mr.Kumar at 7.00 a.m. There, A1 was under the custody of police. He knew him. On enquiry made by the Inspector of Police, A1 has given confession statement and the same has been recorded. Based on confession statement of A1, he took them to the place near Thulasi Lodge and A1 identified M.O.1 - 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 2022machete and M.O.2 - machete and handed over the same to the Inspector of Police. He has signed in the confession statement and his signature is Ex.P4 and also signed in the Seizure Mahazar – Ex.P15.2.7. PW16- K.Sugumar, then Head Constable of Vellore North Police Station deposed that on 19.04.2013 at about midnight 12.00 a.m., he handed over the First Information Report in Crime No.391/2013 before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Vellore and also to higher officials.2.8. PW17- Poonjcholai, then Inspector of Police deposed that on 19.04.2013 while he was in duty, he has received a complaint at 11.00 p.m and he registered a case in Crime No.391/2013 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 302, 506 (ii) IPC. Ex.P6 is the F.I.R. He forwarded the F.I.R to the concerned Court and to higher officials. In continuation of investigation, PW17 went to the scene of occurrence on 20.04.2013 at 00.30 hours and prepared Observation Mahazar – Ex.P8 and Rough Sketch- Ex.P9. In order to avoid law and order issue, he has taken over the body of the deceased and sent the same to Vellore Government Medical College Hospital. He has also seized Ordinary Soil- M.O.4 and Blood Stained Oil – M.O.3 under Seizure Mahazar – Ex.P10.5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 20222.9. In continuation of investigation, on 20.09.2013 at 8.00 a.m., he went to Vellore Government Medical College Hospital and in the presence of PW1 and panchayatdars, he has conducted an inquest over the body of the deceased and prepared the Inquest Report – Ex.P11. He also made a requisition under Ex.P12 to conduct autopsy. He has also examined the above witnesses and recorded their statements. After conducting Autopsy, one Special Sub Inspector of Police Rajendran has handed over M.O.5- Blood Stained Brown Colour Pant, M.O.6 – Blood Stained White Colour Half Sleeve Shirt, M.O.7- Torn Green Colour Underwear, M.O.8- Blood Stained White Colour Torned Banian and the same has been received by him. Thereafter, he has sent the same to the Court.2.10. PW18 – Dr.Nagendirakumar, Assistant Professor, Vellore Government Medical College Hospital deposed that one Doctor -Selvaraj was working with him and he knew his signature. The said Dr.Selvaraj has conducted Autopsy and issued the Postmortem Certificate Ex.P13 and found the following injuries:“Appearance found at the postmortem:Well-nourished body of a male. Finger and toenails pale.6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 2022The following ante-mortem injuries are noted:1.Clean cut injury centre of scalp 10 cm x 1 cm x bone deep2. Clean cut injury over the forehead 18 x 1 cm x bone deep3. Clean cut injury just below the right eye 8 x 1 cm x bone deep. Underlying maxillary bone cut.4. Clean cut injury right cheek 11 cm x 1 cm x bone deep. Underlying maxillary bone cut.5. Two parallel cut injuries on the right lower jaw each 8 x 1 cm x bone deep. Underlying mandible bone cut.6. Clean cut injury just above the right ear 7 x 1 cm x bone deep. Underlying temporal bone cut.7. Right ear cleanly chopped off and missing.8. Clean cut injury right side of hip 5 x 1 cm x bone deep.9. Defence cut injuries on the left upper limb, back of forearm 12 cm x 1 cm x bone deep. Another one on the palm of left hand 6 cm x 1 cm x bone deep. Left middle finger cleanly chopped off and missing. Cut injury base of left ring finger 2 x 1x 1 cm.On dissection of scalp, skull and dura: Sub scalpal contusion seen in the mid-parietal region. Parietal bone cut in the center. Thin subdural and subarachnoid hemorrhage both cerebral hemispheres. He has also opined that the deceased appear to have died due to shock and hemorrhage due to multiple cut injuries in Ex.P14. 2.11. PW19 – Veerappan, then Inspector of Police, continued with the investigation, after transfer of PW17. PW19 deposed that he has inquired the witnesses since the witnesses stated similar statements as stated before PW17 and PW19 has also recorded statement of the witnesses.7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 20222.12. On 27.06.2013, A1 surrendered before the Court of Judicial Magistrate -I, Tirupathur and he has filed statements before the Judicial Magistrate No.4, Vellore to take police custody. As per orders from the Court concerned, he has taken him under police custody and brought him to the police station. On 10.07.2013, A1 has voluntarily given confession statement and the same has been recorded and the admissible portion of the confession statement is Ex.P16. Based on the confession statement, A1 took PW19 and other witnesses to the place called Thulasi lodge and in a thorny bush, he has identified and handed over M.O.1 – Sickle and M.O.2- Sickle under Seizure Mahazar – Ex.P15.2.13. On 11.07.2013, A1 was subjected to judicial custody as per the order of the Court. On 12.07.2013, he has examined the witnesses Narayanan, Nagarajan, Vinoth, Parasuraman and recorded their statements. On 18.07.2013, he went to the Central Prison, Vellore and seen that the other accused were under judicial custody in Crime No.409/2013 under Sections 392 and 397 IPC. He made formal arrest of the other accused and thereafter, he has brought the other accused through Prisoner Transfer Warrant. On 25.07.2013, he made a requisition under Ex.P17 to take Test Identification 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 2022Parade before the Chief Judicial Magistrate. On 29.07.2013, the Judicial Magistrate, Wallajah has conducted Test Identification Parade with regard to A2, A3, A4 and A5. 2.14. On 05.09.2013, on filing appropriate application before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Vellore for taking police custody of A2, A3, A5 and A4. The said application came to be dismissed. He has examined Dr.Selvaraj, who conducted postmortem and the person who conducted Forensic Chemical Examination and recorded their statements. He has received Forensic Chemical Analysis Report Ex.P18. In continuation of his investigation, he recorded the statement of the witnesses. Upon completion of investigation, he has laid the Final Report as against A1 to A6 and another Final Report No.2 as against one Sathya.2.15. After due committal proceedings by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vellore, the case has been committed to the learned Principal District Judge, Vellore and thereafter, the case has been made over to the Trial Court. The Trial Court has framed the following charges as against A1 to A6 on 31.08.2021:-9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 2022A1 – 120(B), 148, 302 r/w.34, 506(ii) and 324 IPCA2 – 120(B), 148, 302 r/w.34, 506(ii) IPCA3 – 120(B), 148, 302 r/w.34, 506(ii) IPCA4, namely Venkat @Venkatesan died and charges framed against him was abated on 15.07.2021.A5- 120(B), 148, 302 r/w. 34 and 506(ii) IPCA6-120(B), 120(B) r/w.148, 302 r/w. 109 r/w. 34 IPC. 2.16. In order to establish the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined the witnesses PW1 to PW19, marked Exs.P1 to P18 and placed M.Os.1 to 8. Defense side has not examined any witness and also not marked any document. When the accused was questioned under Section 313(1) CrPC with regard to incriminating circumstances and materials appearing against him, the accused denied the charges and pleaded not guilty. The Trial Court finds that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted all the accused. Aggrieved over the same, the daughter of the deceased has preferred the present appeal.10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 20223. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that PW3 and PW4 are eye-witnesses to the occurrence and they have categorically deposed about the occurrence committed by the accused persons with deadly weapons. They have clearly deposed that A1 and other accused has attacked the deceased severely and thereafter escaped from the occurrence. The Trial Court failed to consider Section 161 CrPC statement of the witnesses one Chandrasekar @ Chinnappan, who is injured eye-witness and unfortunately he was not examined by the prosecution side. A minor contradiction in the deposition of witnesses would not be fatal to the prosecution, as other part of the prosecution have proved the case regarding guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. The learned counsel for the appellant would further submit that A1, after this occurrence, made an attempt to murder the brother of the deceased and the case was ended in conviction. Further A1 and other accused murdered the deceased’s brother in the year 2017, which was pending committal.4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State / 6th respondent would submit that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt through the eye-witnesses of PW3 and PW4. The minor 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 2022contradiction between the evidence of PW3 and PW4 would not be fatal to the prosecution. The medical evidence also corroborated to the evidence of eye witness. The recovery of M.O.1 and M.O.2 from A1 also strengthened the case of the prosecution. Therefore, the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court is liable to be set aside and the accused persons are found to be guilty and liable to be imposed with appropriate sentence.5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the accused / respondents 1, 2 and 4 would submit that there are material contradictions between the evidence of PW3 and PW4 and they could not be an eye witness to the alleged occurrence. The material witnesses have turned hostile and supported the case of the prosecution. PW1, who said to be a person worked under the deceased and who allegedly lodged the complaint turned hostile and he has admitted his signature alone in the complaint and signature alone marked as Ex.P1. The learned trial Court, after considering the evidence on record, disbelieving the evidence of the eyewitnesses PW3 and PW4 and also finds that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 20226. The learned counsel for the accused/ 3rd respondent and the learned counsel for the accused / 5th respondent would submit that the prosecution witnesses not deposed about the presence of A3 and A5 at the alleged occurrence place or they have chosen to identify the accused in the Test Identification Parade. There is no piece of evidence as against them. The prosecution miserably failed to prove the case with regard to involvement of this accused / A3 and A5 in the alleged occurrence. The Trial Court has rightly acquitted the accused from all the charges, there is no merit in this appeal.7. We have considered the rival submissions advanced on either side and also perused the available records.8. In order to establish the case, the prosecution has relied upon the following circumstances: (1) Eye witness of PW3 and PW4.(2) Recovery of M.O.1 and M.O.2(3) Medical Evidence. 13 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 20229. According to the prosecution, due to business rivalry, enmity arose between A6/Raghu and the deceased G.G.Ramesh. A1’s friend Nagu @ Nagaraj was arrested by police, on the basis of information given by the deceased. Hence A1 developed grudge against the deceased. On 20.03.2011, A1 along with his men attempted to murder the deceased and hence, a case in Crime No.146/2011 under Section307 IPC came to be registered against A1 and his men. Further, the deceased and his men have attempted to commit murder towards A1 on 25.03.2012 and hence, a case in Cr.No.295/2012 under Section 307 IPC was registered against the deceased G.G.Ramesh and his men.MOTIVE10. In order to prove the enmity between the deceased and A1 and one of the eye witnesses to the occurrence and lodging complaint, the prosecution has relied upon the evidence of PW1-Narayanan, who was working in the finance company belongs to the deceased. PW1 deposed that he does not know the accused. When he was in the finance company, on the 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 2022basis of the request made by the police, he had signed in blank paper, which do not have any content with regard to the alleged occurrence happened near Kottaiyadi Kuppusamy Mudaliyar High School, Vellore. He does not know anything about the case. PW1 turned hostile, not supported to the case of the prosecution. Except PW1, no other prosecution witness have been examined to speak about enmity or motive in this case. It is to be noted that if there is an eye witness to the occurrence, then the motive for the offence may not arise at all.11. Further, according to the prosecution, due to the above said rivalry, prior to 19.04.2013, on the instigation of A6/Raghu, A1 to A5 conspired and agreed to do an illegal act of causing death of the deceased. In the course of same transaction and in view of criminal conspiracy on the instigation of A6, A1 to A5 have joined together and unlawfully assembled with deadly weapons. Further, on 19.04.2013 on the instigation of A6/Raghu, A1 to A5, who concealed themselves on the backside of the ambulance, which was parked opposite side to the school, on seeing the deceased, who came to pass urine, A1 to A5 suddenly came out and committed the offence of murder, A1 cut on head of the deceased with Machete and A1 to A5 assaulted the 15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 2022deceased on head and all over the body with Machete and when witness PW1, PW6, PW3, PW4 and one Ravi Raj and few public shouted and tried to catch hold of A1 to A5, they criminally intimidated them with dire consequences. Further, according to the prosecution, in the course of same transaction, A1 while rotating his machete, he voluntarily caused injury to witness Chandrasekar @ Chinnappaiyan on his right palm. EYE WITNESSES – PW3 AND PW412. PW3 – Krishnamoorthy, in his chief examination deposed that he knew A1 alone and not known to the other accused. On 19.04.2013 at about 8.30 p.m. to 9.00 p.m., PW3 was sitting along with PW4-Sivakumar in the finance company belongs to the deceased G.G.Ramesh. While so, the deceased left his company informing that he has to attend natures call, at that time 4 persons with knife alighted from the ambulance and assaulted the deceased. A1 assaulted the deceased with knife and A1 threatened the public by showing knife. The public ran away from the place, PW3 and PW4 have also ran away from the occurrence place. Thereafter, PW3 and PW4 saw the deceased laid down pool of blood. Thereafter, Vellore North Police has arrived the place and they inquired PW3 and they obtained signature from PW3.16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 202213. PW4-Sivakumar deposed in his chief examination that he knew A1 alone and not known other accused. On 19.04.2013, between 8.00 p.m. to 9.00 p.m., when he went to the finance company which belongs to the deceased to talk with him. After he met the deceased, thereafter the deceased closed his shop and while so, the deceased left the place to pass urine, at that time from the opposite side, A1 along with 3 or 4 persons came and assaulted the deceased. Public who gathered there have shouted and they inquired the accused persons. On seeing the same and after getting intimidated by the accused persons, PW4 ran away from the place. 14. PW6 Nagaraj turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution. PW3 and PW4 have not stated about the presence of PW1-Narayananan, who is working under the deceased finance company, while they chatting with deceased in his finance company (or) PW1 saw the alleged occurrence along with PW3, PW4 and PW6. PW4 has not stated the presence of PW3 at the time of alleged occurrence, whereas PW3 alone says the presence of PW4, when PW3 was sitting along with PW4 and witnessed the alleged occurrence. PW3 and PW4 have not stated about the place of the 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 2022alleged occurrence happened. PW3 says that the accused have alighted from ambulance, whereas PW4 has not stated anything about the ambulance. PW3 and PW4 have not stated anything about one witness Chandrasekar @Chinnapaiyan caused injury while A1 was rotating the machete. PW3 in his cross examination deposed that he has not stated before police, from which direction the accused have come to the alleged occurrence place. Police has inquired him after 3 or 4 days. PW3 admits that he has not specifically stated which accused threatened the public by showing machete. PW3 was present at the alleged occurrence place till night 12.00 a.m. PW3 admits that he did not try to save the deceased.15. PW4 in his cross examination deposed that within 5 minutes, the police and ambulance have reached the alleged occurrence place. Thereafter, police have taken the deceased body. PW4 admits that he had not stated that in which direction the accused have arrived to the alleged occurrence place. He has not stated before police for what reason he went to meet the deceased, on the alleged occurrence day. Though the prosecution has cited as a witness one Chandrasekar @ Chinnapaiyan as LW9 in the list of witness and also cited as injured witness, while the accused A1 rotating his Machete he voluntarily caused injury to the said witness. However, 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 2022aforesaid witness was not examined as prosecution side before the Court. Considering the above circumstances and that the evidence of PW3 and PW4 are contradictory to each other and unnatural, therefore their evidence are unbelievable one. RECOVERY OF M.O.1 AND M.O.216. PW19 – Inspector of Police deposed that he came to know that A1 had surrendered before the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tirupathur and upon filing appropriate application, took him under police custody for further investigation. On 10.07.2013, he examined A1 in the presence of PW15-Sounderajan and one Kumar. A1 has voluntarily gave confession statement. The admissible portion of the confession statement is Ex.P16. Based on the confession statement, A1 took them near to a place called Thulasi Lodge and near a thorny bush, he has identified and handed over M.O.1 and M.O.2 – machete. PW15 – Sounderajan deposed that on 10.07.2013, he went to Vellore North Police Station along with his Assistant at 7.00 a.m., where A1 in police station. On enquiry, A1 gave confession statement and the same has been recorded and he signed in the confession statement and his signature is Ex.P4 and also signed in the Seizure Mahazar – Ex.P15. Based on the confession statement of A1, he took them to the 19 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 2022place near thorny bush and A1 identified M.O.1 and M.O.2 and handed over the same to PW19.17. The evidence of PW19 and PW15 reveals that based on the confession statement given by A1, M.O.1 and M.O.2 have been recovered. Since the alleged occurrence was held on 19.04.2013, A1 came to be surrendered before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tirupathur on 27.06.2013 and PW19 said to have taken A1 under police custody and examined only on 10.07.2013 and thereafter, M.O.1 and M.O.2 were recovered in pursuance of the confession statement of A1. Admittedly, as per Ex.P15 – Seizure Mahazar, there is no blood stains found on M.O.1 and M.O.2. Admittedly, except the recovery of M.O.1 and M.O.2., no other weapon has been recovered from any other accused.18. It is the evidence of PW18 that one Dr.Selvaraju has conducted autopsy and has issued Postmortem Certificate and found the following injuries: “Appearance found at the postmortem:Well-nourished body of a male. Finger and toenails pale.The following ante-mortem injuries are noted:1.Clean cut injury centre of scalp 10 cm x 1 cm x bone deep20 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 20222. Clean cut injury over the forehead 18 x 1 cm x bone deep3. Clean cut injury just below the right eye 8 x 1 cm x bone deep. Underlying maxillary bone cut.4. Clean cut injury right cheek 11 cm x 1 cm x bone deep. Underlying maxillary bone cut.5. Two parallel cut injuries on the right lower jaw each 8 x 1 cm x bone deep. Underlying mandible bone cut.6. Clean cut injury just above the right ear 7 x 1 cm x bone deep. Underlying temporal bone cut.7. Right ear cleanly chopped off and missing.8. Clean cut injury right side of hip 5 x 1 cm x bone deep.9. Defence cut injuries on the left upper limb, back of forearm 12 cm x 1 cm x bone deep. Another one on the palm of left hand 6 cm x 1 cm x bone deep. Left middle finger cleanly chopped off and missing. Cut injury base of left ring finger 2 x 1x 1 cm.On dissection of scalp, skull and dura: Sub scalpal contusion seen in the mid-parietal region. Parietal bone cut in the center. Thin subdural and subarachnoid hemorrhage both cerebral hemispheres. As per Ex.P14- Final Opinion issued by the doctor, the deceased appear to have died due to shock and hemorrhage due to multiple cut injuries. As per Ex.P13- Postmortem Certificate, there are as many as 8 cut injuries and right ear was cleanly chopped and missing and the left hand middle finger cleanly chopped and missing. 19. As per the evidence of PW19, there are 2 weapons, namely M.O.1 and M.O.2 have been recovered from A1 alone and not other accused. In such circumstances, the prosecution has failed to prove that A1 alone, by using M.O.1 and M.O.2, have inflicted several cut injuries on the deceased.21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 202220. As per the evidence of PW3 and PW4, they have identified A1 only and they have not stated anything about the weapon M.O.1 and M.O.2 used by A1 and the nature of injuries inflicted on the deceased at the time of the alleged occurrence. The evidence of PW3 and PW4 are not clear with regard to proving the several cut injuries inflicted on the deceased. Further they have identified only A1 and they have clearly stated that other persons were not known to them. The prosecution though able to prove the homicidal death, has failed to prove the nexus between M.O.1 and M.O.2 with A1 on the injuries inflicted on the deceased.21. On 29.07.2013, the Judicial Magistrate, Wallajah has conducted Test Identification Parade with regard to A2, A3, A4 and A5. The witnesses said to have seen the accused are PW1, PW3, PW4 and PW6. During the Test Identification Parade conducted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Wallajah, Vellore District, the aforesaid witnesses have not identified the aforesaid accused. Therefore, involvement of the aforesaid accused creates doubt in this case. The recovery of M.O.1 and M.O.2 from A1 alone is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused.22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 202222. The prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The Trial Court upon appreciating the material documents and deposition of witnesses, has rightly found that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and the benefit of doubt goes in favour of the accused. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the well considered judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court and finds no merit in this appeal.23. In the result, this Criminal Appeal stands dismissed, confirming the judgment of acquittal dated 16.03.2022 in S.C.No.132 of 2019, passed by the learned Additional Judge (Fast Track Court), Vellore. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stands dismissed. [P.V., J.] [M.J.R., J.]19.12.2025Index: Yes Internet: Yes JvmTo1. The Additional Judge, (Fast Track Court), Vellore.23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 20222.The Inspector of Police, Vellore North Police Station, Vellore, (Crime No.391 / 13)3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.P.VELMURUGAN, J.andM.JOTHIRAMAN, J.JvmCrl.A.No.578 of 202224 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.578 of 202219.12.202525