Man’s life sentence upheld for repeatedly hacking stepfather to death and injuring his mother

On 23 December 2020, the appellant allegedly attacked his stepfather, Balusamy, with a vegetable cutter, inflicting multiple chop injuries that proved fatal, and also injured his mother, Vellaiammal.

Neighbours PW1 and PW4 testified that they witnessed the attack; PW2 arrived shortly afterwards and was told by Vellaiammal that the appellant had attacked the deceased.

Medical evidence recorded extensive head and facial injuries to the deceased and a forehead injury to Vellaiammal.

The Principal Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 307 IPC and imposed life imprisonment and three years’ simple imprisonment, respectively.

The appellant appealed, arguing, among other things, that the attack arose from a sudden quarrel and that injuries noted on him had not been explained.

Whether the evidence established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant caused the fatal injuries to the deceased and injured Vellaiammal.

Whether the alleged sudden quarrel and injuries sustained by the appellant brought the killing within an exception to Section 300 IPC, so as to displace the conviction under Section 302 IPC.

Whether the trial proceedings, including the representation provided by legal-aid counsel, disclosed any basis to interfere with the convictions.

The Court considered Sections 300, 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

Section 300 defines murder and its exceptions; where the proved act does not fall within an exception, a murder conviction under Section 302 may stand.

Section 307 concerns an attempt to murder.

The Court also referred to Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act, treating PW2’s account of what Vellaiammal told him shortly after the occurrence as part of the same transaction (res gestae).

No precedent was cited.

The Court accepted PW1 and PW4 as eyewitnesses, finding no apparent reason for them to falsely implicate the appellant, and considered their testimony consistent with the medical evidence documenting numerous chop wounds.

PW2’s evidence was treated as res gestae because he arrived soon after the occurrence and the information was given without a substantial interval.

Although the appellant had injuries noted at remand, the Court recorded that he had attributed them to a stone thrown by the deceased and found them insufficient to undermine the prosecution case.

The repeated and severe injuries inflicted on the deceased, together with the attack on the appellant’s mother, led the Court to conclude that the appellant had acted cruelly and taken undue advantage; it therefore rejected the claim that the case fell within an exception to Section 300 IPC.

It also found that the material witnesses had been properly examined and saw no resulting ground for appellate interference.

It dismissed the appeal, confirmed the judgment dated 10 April 2023 in S.C.No.275 of 2021, and closed the miscellaneous petition concerning suspension of sentence.