IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 303 OF 2007

MURUGAN & ANR. ..... APPELLANTS

VERSUS

STATE REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR  OF POLICE ..... RESPONDENT

O R D E R  

The accused, initially nine in number, were brought  

to trial before the Sessions Court for offences punishable  

under Sections 302/149 etc. of the Indian Penal Code  and  

were  sentenced  to  life  and  to  various  other  terms  of  

imprisonment.  An appeal taken to the High Court was also  

dismissed.

A Special Leave Petition was thereafter filed in this  

Court by seven of the accused and while leave was granted  

with  respect  to  Murugan  and  Vellathai,  who  are  the  

appellants before us,  the petition qua the other accused  

was dismissed.  The present appeal is thus confined only to  

Murugan and Vellathai.   

Mr. M. Gireesh Kumar, the learned counsel for the  

appellants has raised only one argument during the course  

of the hearing.  He has pointed out that even as per the

evidence  recorded  by  the  courts  below  no  active  role  

whatsoever had been attributed by P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 (who  

were the only eye witnesses to the incident) as they had  

deposed  that  Vellathai  had  merely  instigated  the  other  

seven  accused  to  attack  and  kill  the  deceased  for  the  

humility that she had suffered at his hands about  ten days  

before the incident when the deceased had slapped her in  

public.  He has, further, submitted that it was clear from  

the record that the entire family had been roped in for the  

murder   as  three  of  the  accused  Nos.  1,  4-7  were  the  

brothers  of  Vellathai,  Accused  No.  5  was  the  sister's  

husband of Vellathai, accused No. 6 was son of accused No.  

5 and accused No. 8 was son of accused No. 1 and as there  

was admittedly very serious enmity between the parties on  

account of several factors including an earlier murder, the  

possibility of  false implication could not be ruled out.  

The learned counsel for the State, Mr. S. Thananjayan  

has, however, pointed out that the evidence of the three  

prosecution witnesses referred to above had attributed a  

specific role  to  Vellathai and as she was the person who  

had been insulted by the deceased ten days earlier she was  

the prime mover in the incident.

We have considered the  arguments put forth by the  

learned counsel for the parties.   

As per the prosecution story, the slapping incident  

happened about ten days prior to the present incident.  It

is the case of the prosecution that the deceased and P.Ws.  

1,2 and 3 were way laid by the accused in the field of one  

Shanmuga Thevar and the deceased had been thereafter done  

to death in a brutal manner.  We are somewhat unable to  

accept this story in the light of the fact that the murder  

was  obviously  pre-planned  and  Vellathai,  a  lady  and  a  

sister of three of the accused would have been a part of  

the group that was to commit the murder.  It is also clear  

from the record that the animosity between the parties had  

existed since long and several instances including one of  

murder had taken place inter se them over the years.  We  

also see that Vellathai's entire family  has been roped in  

and  in  the  light  of  the  facts  given  above  there  is  a  

possibility that she too had been roped in.

As far as Murugan is concerned, even  the learned  

State counsel has not been able to point out any active  

role to him.  We, therefore, feel that this is a case where  

the  benefit  of  doubt  should  be  given  to  both  the  

appellants.

In the light of the above, we allow the appeal, set  

aside the order of the High Court and order the acquittal  

of the appellants.  

    ..................J      [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

    ..................J      [R.M. LODHA]

NEW DELHI      OCTOBER 07, 2009.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 303 OF 2007

MURUGAN & ANR. ..... APPELLANTS

VERSUS

STATE REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR  OF POLICE ..... RESPONDENT

O R D E R

We  have  heard  the  learned  counsel  for  the  

parties.

Vide  our  separate  reasoned  order,  we  have  

allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the High  

Court and order acquittal of both the appellants.   

It  is  stated  by  Mr.  M.  Gireesh  Kumar,  the  

learned counsel for the appellants that the appellant  

is in jail. We direct that the both the appellants  

shall be set at liberty forthwith if not required in  

connection  with  any  other  case.    

The reasoned order to follow.   

    ..................J      [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

    ..................J

    [R.M. LODHA]

NEW DELHI OCTOBER 07, 2009.