CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 517 of 2007 PETITIONER: MANICKAM RESPONDENT: STATE BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, T. NADU DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13/02/2008 BENCH: P.P. NAOLEKAR & P. SATHASIVAM JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
O R D E R
1. Appellant Manickam along with two other accused Palani and Oomaiyan @ Mani
was tried for the offences under Sections 449/324/302/109 of Indian Penal Code ( in
short IPC) on the allegation that on 26.12.1993 at about 8.00 a.m. in
Vizhududaiyan Village, appellant along with accused Palani and Oomaiyan
trespassed into the house of Anbalagan, caused simple injuries on the person of
Alamelu (PW 4) and Anjalai (PW 5) and committed the murder of Anbalagan.
2. The Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli, by his judgment dated 8.10.1996 acquitted the
appellant and the other accused persons. Challenging the said judgment of the
Sessions Judge, the State filed an appeal before the High Court. The High Court by
its impugned judgment dated 21.7.2006 acquitted accused Palani and Oomaiyan but
set aside the judgment in respect of appellant-accused and held him guilty under
Section 304 (Part-II) IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 5 years.
3. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment of the High Court, the appellant has
preferred the present appeal by special leave.
4. We have heard learned senior counsel for the parties and have perused the evidence
on record. PW 4 Alamelu, the wife of Anbalagan (since deceased) and PW 5 Anjalai,
who also sustained injuries in the incident, have supported the prosecution case
coupled with the statement of appellant-accused recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
On consideration of the aforesaid evidence, we do not find any infirmity in the
impugned judgment of the High Court. However, considering the facts that the
appellant-accused is an old person aged about 77 years, the incident is of the year
1993, the appellant-accused was convicted for exceeding the right of private defence
and he has already undergone sentence for more than 1= years, the ends of justice will
be served if he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. We order
accordingly. The appellant-accused be set at liberty if he is not required in any other
case.
4. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
