REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF  INDIA      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

   CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.  1501   OF 2010 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.)No. 7536/2009)

MAYANDI                                   Petitioner(s)

                VERSUS

STATE REP.BY INSP.OF POLICE                  Respondent(s)

O R D E R

Leave granted.

We had issued notice only with regard to the  

nature of the offence on 14th September 2009.

We have heard the learned counsel for both  

parties.

The brief facts necessary for the disposal of  

this appeal are as under:

The appellant was an employee working in the  

kitchen of Palmgrove Hotel, Chennai. At about 6.15 a.m. on 8th  

February  2005,   the  deceased  Tr.  Manickaraja  Bala,  the  

Managing Director of the hotel, came to the store room for  

carrying out a store check.  As the deceased was returning to  

his office after checking the store,  the appellant  

-2-

attacked him with a sickle which he had concealed on his  

person.  When the deceased tried to escape, the appellant  

made a further attack on him and caused him several injuries

on his body and on his hands as well. PW.1-Tr. Raghavendran,  

PW.3-P.S.R. Aziri, PW.4-Tr. Pravin Padival who were around  

the place came  rushing to the rescue the deceased but the  

appellant nevertheless ran away from the spot.  PW.2, PW.4  

and  several  others  then  took  the  deceased  to  the  Apollo  

hospital where he was admitted to the Intensive Care Unit.

A FIR was thereafter recorded for an offence  

punishable under Sections 307 etc. of the I.P.C. and on the  

death of the injured at about 3.30 a.m.  on 9th February  2005  

the case was altered to one under Section 302 etc. of the  

IPC.

The  Trial  Court  on  a  consideration  of  the  

evidence convicted the appellant for an offence punishable  

under  Sections  302,  506  (II)  and  341  of  the  IPC.   This  

judgment was maintained by the High Court as well.  It is in  

this situation that the matter is before us today.

Mr. R.Shunmugham Sundram, the learned senior  

counsel for the appellant has pointed out that a bare perusal  

of the injuries, the post-mortem report and the evidence of  

the  Doctor  would  show  that  the  injuries  caused  by  the  

appellant were not the cause of his death and he had in fact  

died of Myocardial Infarction leading  to heart failure.  He  

-3-

has further submitted that the fact that the deceased was  

already a heart patient and had undergone angioplasty was a  

fact not within the knowledge of the appellant and in this  

view of the matter a case under Section 302 IPC was not spelt  

out.

Mr.  R.  Sunderavardan,  the  learned  senior

counsel for the respondent has however pointed out that even  

assuming that the immediate cause of death was the Myocardial  

Infarction and not the injuries caused to the deceased but in  

the light of the admitted fact that the appellant was an  

employee of the hotel of which the deceased was the Managing  

Director and that very severe injuries had indeed been caused  

with  a  sickle,   required  that   the  appellant  would  be  

punishable under Section 304 Part-I, IPC.  

We have considered the arguments advanced by  

the learned counsel.   

We reproduce the injuries found on the dead  

body of the deceased at the time of the post-mortem.

“Bandage seen over left forearm  

and  right  forearm  below  right  below.  Elastocreps  

bandage  seen  on  top  of  left  shoulder,  Front  of

chest and back of chest.

-4-

An  Elastocreps  bandage  on  the  

right side of the neck.

1 Left  shoulder  –  on  removal  of  

plaster:

2

3 A  stapled  sutured  wound  seen  on  

the front of outer third of lest  

chest (crossing top of the outer  

as  aspect  of  the  left  shoulder)  

extending  up  to  outer  aspect  of  

back  of  left  side  chest.   The

total length is 16 cms.

1 A  metallic  wire  is  seen  on  the  

outer  aspect  of  the  left  

shoulder – 4 cm long on removal  

of  the  sutures  (staples)  the  

acromio-calvicular  joint  was  

fixed with a tension bank wire.  

The  surrounding  soft  tissues  

were found repaired 16 x 1.5 cm  

x bone deep.   

2

3 2.  Right  hand  –  curved  sutured  

would  seen  over  the  right  palm  

extending from the volar aspect of  

the  right  wrist  passing  through  

the  right  thenar  eminence  

extending  to  the  base  of  right  

thumb on the dorsal aspect.  The  

total length is 18 c.m.

-5-

1 -  On  removal  of  sutures  the  

margins are regular -  

2

3 On  further  dissection  the  

underlying muscles of the right  

thumb,  nerves,  blood  vessels  

were found repaired 18 x 3 cms.  

Muscle deep.

4

5 3. A sutured wound on the palmer  

aspect of the left thumb in the  

middle  third,A  curved  sutured  

would seen over the left thenar

eminence 6 cm Long.  On removal  

of the sutures the margins are  

clean  out,  the  underlying  

muscles found repaired 6 x 2 cm  

x muscle deep.

6

7 HEART

8 An old vertical midline scar 18 cm Long seen  

in  the  midline  of  chest  extending  down  

from the suprasternal notch.  On opening  

the  thorax  the  underlying  sternum   was  

found sutured with stainless steel wire  

(old) on further dissection the heart was  

found grossly enlarged with increase in  

pericardial fat.

9

10 On  dissection  of  the  heart  massive  

atheromatous  changes  seen  in  the  root  of  

aorta.  Coronary artery by pass site made  

out  and  stend  in  situ.  Heart  sent  for

Histopathological  examination.   Coronary  

vessels found narrowed.”

-6-

PW.13  also  noted  that  the  deceased  had  died  due  to  

complications  arising  out  of  Myocardial  infarction  and  

admitted  that  in  the  post-mortem  report  there  was  no  

suggestion that the death was a result of the injuries.

The learned counsel has also brought to our  

notice the death summary (Ext.p.8) which had been recorded in  

Apollo hospital by the attending Doctor (PW.8) who stated  

that as the deceased had lost a great deal of blood as the  

blood vessels had been cut and complications had arisen on  

account  of  his  age  (which  was  about  70  years)  and   was  

already a heart patient, the cause of death was:

Coronary  Artery  disease  :  

Acute  Coronary  Syndrome,  Post  Coronary  

Revascularisation status, practical post, Coronary  

artery bypass and post stent.  Post-hand surgery  

status and Diabetes mellitus. Since he was already  

having heart disease bypass surgery had been done  

to him.  Afterwards heart trouble had occurred to  

him.”

Keeping  

in mind  

the said  

facts  

the High  

Court  

observed  

that:

“In  view  of  the  above  

categorical evidence of PW.8 and PW.13, we are of  

the considered view that though it had been stated  

in Post Mortem report that the death was due to  

the  

-7-

complications  of  Myocardial  Infarction,  such  

complications  is  directly  attributed  to  the

injuries inflicted by the accused which resulted  

in interruption of the free flow of the blood not  

only  to  the  various  vital  organs  but  also  the  

heart and therefore the contention of the learned  

Senior counsel for the accused is liable to be  

rejected and accordingly the same is rejected.”

We have considered the reasons given by the  

High Court and also considered the evidence above referred.

It is the admitted fact that the Doctors have  

not opined that the death was caused due to the injuries  

caused by the appellant.  There is also no evidence to show  

that the injuries could have independently caused the death  

of the deceased even if the deceased had not been suffering  

from a heart problem.  It is also the conceded position that  

the deceased had a serious heart problem which was matter not  

within  the  appellant's  knowledge  and  on  the  contrary  the  

medical  evidence  reveals  that  he  had  undergone  an

angioplasty  but  had  nevertheless  suffered  a  heart  attack  

thereafter.

In  this  background  the  High  Court's  

assertion  that the death was occasioned by  complications on  

account of the injuries caused by the  appellant is not quite  

accurate.  We are, therefore, of the opinion that the case  

would  fall  within  Section  326  of  the  IPC  and  not  under  

Section 302 of the IPC thereof.

-8-

Mr.  R.  Sundravardan's  argument  that  this  

matter would nevertheless fall within Section 304 Part-I or  

Part  -II  of  the  IPC,  is  also  rejected  as  there  was  no  

intention on the part of  appellant to cause the death of the  

deceased nor could he be attributed with the knowledge that

death would be caused.

We accordingly partly allow this appeal,  set  

aside the acquittal and conviction of the appellant for the  

offence  under  Section  302  of  the  IPC,  and  alter  his  

conviction to one under Section 326 of the IPC and award a  

sentence of 10 years R.I. and a  fine of Rs.5,000/- and in  

default thereof,  six months  R.I.  The sentence  under the  

other provisions of the IPC is maintained.

The appeal is allowed in the above terms.

.................J. (HARJIT SINGH BEDI)

     .................J.         (C.K. PRASAD)

New Delhi;

July 28, 2010.