IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.221 OF 2002

Alagappan @ Murugan & Anr.        ...Appellant(s)

Versus

State by Public Prosecutor, Madras           ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The appellants were tried for offence under Section 302 read with Section  34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [for short, “the I.P.C.”] on the charge of having  

committed murder of Gopal on 18.5.1991.  The trial court returned the finding of not  guilty and acquitted the appellants.  The High Court allowed the appeal preferred by  

the State of Tamil Nadu and convicted the appellants under Section 302 read with  Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced each one of them to undergo imprisonment for life.  

Hence, this appeal. The  prosecution  case  was  supported  by  Thangamuthu  [P.W.1],  

Kannupillai [P.W.2], Pachiammal [P.W.3] and Boopathy [P.W.4], all of them claimed  to be eye-witnesses to the occurrence.  Their evidence is corroborated by the medical  

evidence.  Therefore, the trial court was not justified in disbelieving the eye-witnesses  and  the  judgment  and  order  of  acquittal  passed  by  it  suffered  from  the  vice  of  

perversity and the High Court rightly found them guilty. ...2/-

- 2 -  

The question, which remains to be considered, is whether the High Court  was justified  in convicting the  appellants  under  Section 302 read with Section 34  

I.P.C.  In his statement, Dr. Suryamurthy [P.W.7], who conducted post mortem, gave  out that the deceased appears to have died of haemorrhage due to injuries to the  

major blood vessels of the left arm.  Therefore, the appellants could not have been  convicted under Section 302 I.P.C.  At the highest, their case would be covered by  

Part-II of Section 304 I.P.C. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the  

accused persons have remained in custody for a period of about one year.  In view of  the nature of injury and taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances,  

we  are  of  the  view  that  ends  of  justice  would  be  met  in  case  the  sentence  of  imprisonment  awarded  against  the  appellants  is  reduced  to  the  period  already  

undergone by them. Accordingly,  the  appeal  is  allowed in-part,  conviction  of  the  appellants  

under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. is set aside.  They are convicted under  Section 304 Part-II I.P.C. and sentenced to the period already undergone by them.

The appellants, who are on bail, are discharged from the liability of bail  bonds.  

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, April 30, 2009.