Madras High Court
Karthick Raja vs The State Rep. By on 4 November, 2025
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
Crl.A.No.455 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
Crl.A.No.455 of 2019
Karthick Raja ... Appellant/Accused
-vs-
The State Rep. by
Inspector of Police,
D-4, Kuniyamuthur Police Station
Kuniyamuthur, Coimbatore
Coimbatore District
Crime No.39 of 2018 ... Respondent/Complainant
Prayer: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C. against
the judgment of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Coimbatore convicting the appellant under Sections 302 IPC by a judgment
dated 07.01.2019 in S.C.No.177 of 2018 for the offence under Section 302
IPC sentencing him for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to
undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Balasubramaniam
1/15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
Crl.A.No.455 of 2019
For Respondent : Mr.A.Damodaran
Addl. Public Prosecutor
Assisted by Ms.M.Arifa Thasneem
Advocate
*****
JUDGMENT
(By N.Sathish Kumar, J.)
Aggrieved over the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated
07.01.2019 in S.C.No.177 of 2018 passed by the I Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, the appellant / accused has filed the present
criminal appeal.
2. The Appellant herein, who is the sole Accused in S.C.No.177 of
2018 on the file of learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Coimbatore, stands convicted by the trial Court for an offence under Section
302 IPC as follows:
Sl.No. Conviction Sentence
1. Section 302 IPCTo undergo Life Imprisonment with
fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to pay fine
to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a
period of 3 Months.
The period of remand already undergone by the accused was directed to be
set off. Aggrieved by the order of the learned I Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, the Appellant has preferred the present
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
Criminal Appeal before this Court
3. Brief Facts of the Prosecution case are as follows:
(i) PW1 (Vishnu) and PW2 (Amitkumar) and the deceased are
friends and they are from Utter Pradesh. They used to sell blankets by
staying in a lodge. On 15.01.2018, PWs 1 and 2 and the deceased as usual
went to sell the blankets. After selling the blankets, they were searching for
a hotel near Siruvani Water Tank at about 03.00pm and the deceased
enquired about the hotel with the accused and the accused demanded money
from the deceased for showing the hotel, but the deceased refused to pay the
money. Enraged over the same, the accused hit the deceased on the head
and the deceased fell down, he was taken to Malliga Hospital in a auto
belonging to PW5 (Rajagopal) by PWs 1 and 2. PW3(Rangasamy), who
was running a tea shop in the place of occurrence, has also seen PWs 1 and
2 taking the deceased to the hospital and PW4 (Thillairaj) has also seen the
accused running after beating the deceased. PW6 (Abdul Jaffar) is the
owner of the lodge where the deceased and Pws1 and 2 were staying and
immediately after the occurrence, PW1 informed PW6, they rushed to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
Malliga Hospital from where the deceased was referred to the Government
Hospital where the doctors declared him brought dead.
(ii) Upon receiving information, the police immediately came to the
hospital and PW1 gave a statement in Hindi, which was translated to Tamil
by Grade I Constable-Abdul Raheem (PW14), who knew Hindi and the
statement has been marked as Ex.P1. PW9 (Ilango), who is the Medical
Officer attached to the Malliga Hospital, gave a statement to the effect that
on 15.01.2018 at about 03.45 pm, the deceased was brought to the hospital
by his friends and it was informed that near Siruvani water tank, the
deceased was attacked by a person. PW9 noted laceration on the backside
of the deceased head and issued Exs.P6 (intimation to the police) and P7
(wound certificate) and referred the injured to the Government Hospital.
PW10 (Prasannakumar), who is the Medical Officer attached to the
Government Hospital, Coimbatore admitted that the deceased was brought
dead and has also stated that there was 3 x 2 cm laceration on the back of his
head and sent the dead body to the mortuary and issued Ex.P8 (AIR copy)
and also sent the death intimation (Ex.P9). PW15, the Sub-Inspector of
Police, after receipt of the intimation, went to the hospital and recorded the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
statement of PW1, which was translated in Tamil by PW14-Abdul Raheem,
the Grade I Constable and registered a case in Crime No.39 of 2018 for an
offence under Section 302 IPC under Ex.P15 (FIR) and forwarded the FIR
to the Court and a copy was marked to PW17 (Investigation Officer), the
investigation officer took up the case for investigation and went to the
hospital and examined PWs 1 and 2 and also went to the place of occurrence
on the same day and prepared observation mahazar (Ex.P2) in the presence
of PW7 and also drawn a rough sketch (Ex.P19) and also collected the
blood stained earth and ordinary earth in the place of occurrence, which
have been marked as MO2 and MO3 under Ex.P3-mahazar. Thereafter, on
16.01.2018, conducted inquest over the dead body and the inquest report has
been marked as Ex.P20 and a request was made to the Medical Officer to
conduct autopsy. PW11, the Medical Officer conducted the autopsy based
on Exs.P10 and the Postmortem Certificate has been marked as Ex.P11 and
in the post-mortem following injuries were found:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
External Injuries
Laceration 3 x 1 cm x subcutaneous deep noted over right
parietal eminence with surrounding graze abrasion noted over
right parietal region.
Internal Injuries
On dissection of scalp, skull and dura: Reddish and scalpal
contusion 4 x 3 cm seen over right parietal eminence. Diffuse
Sub dural and sub-arachnoid hemorrhage seen over both cerebral
hemisphere. Contusion noted over both frontal lobe left temporal
lobe and mid brain region.
4. The post-mortem doctor gave a final opinion opining that the
deceased died approximately 12 to 24 hours prior to the post-mortem due to
injuries on the head and brain. PW17 in continuation of investigation has
also collected blood stained shirt, pant from the Grade I Constable (PW12)
and forwarded the same to the Court under Ex.P21 (Form 95) and thereafter,
on 16.01.2018, arrested the accused in the presence of PW8 and recorded his
confession and the admitted portion of the confession is Ex.P4, seized MO1
and produced the accused before Court for remand and recorded further
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
statement of witnesses and laid the charge sheet for the offence 302 IPC.
5.The Investigating Officer, after completing the investigation, laid
final report against the accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC before
the learned Judicial Magistrate VII, Coimbatore.
6.On appearance of the accused, the provision of Section 207 Cr.P.C.
was complied with and the case was committed to the learned Principal
District and Sessions Court, Coimbatore as contemplated under Section 209
of CrPC in S.C.No.177 of 2018 and was made over to the learned I
Additional District Judge, Coimbatore.
7. In order to bring on the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has
examined as many as 17 witnesses and exhibited 22 documents and 5
material objects.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
8. The trial Court, after appreciation of evidence, found the accused
guilty of offence under Section 302 of IPC and imposed life sentence with
fine of Rs.1000/- with default sentence. Challenging the said judgment, the
accused has filed the instant appeal.
9. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that
the witnesses examined by the prosecution are interested witnesses and
therefore, conviction recorded solely relying on those witnesses is not
proper. Further, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant
that the accused had no intention whatsoever to commit the offence and the
occurrence took place due to sudden quarrel as there was a
miscommunication since the deceased and other witnesses were affluent
only in Hindi and the accused was not able to understand the conversation
and as a result, the accused was provoked and committed the commence.
Therefore, it is contended that the accused had no intention of causing
murder and the act of the accused would fall within the ambit of exception
under Section 300 IPC. Therefore, at the most the accused would be guilty
of offence only under Section 304 IPC and not under Section 302 IPC and
hence, prayed for leniency.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
10. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit
that the accused beat the deceased since the deceased has refused to pay the
money and there is clear motive and intention established on the part of the
accused.
11. We have considered the rival submissions and also perused the
entire materials.
12. PWs 1 and 2, the eye witnesses, have clearly stated that they went
to Kuniyamuthur for sale of the blankets, after selling the blankets, they all
came near the Siruvani water tank and were in search of a hotel, the
deceased enquired with the accused about the hotel and there arose a
quarrel, as the accused demanded money and the accused beat the deceased
with MO1. PW3, who was owning the tea shop near the place of
occurrence, also seen the accused beating the deceased and running away
and PW4 has also seen the accused running from the place of occurrence
with MO2. PW7 has also seen PWs 1 and 2 lifting the deceased asking for
auto to take the victim to the hospital. The occurrence took place at
03.00pm, immediately, PWs 1 and 2 with the help of PW5 (auto driver)
took him to the hospital and PW6, the lodge owner where PWs 1 and 2 and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
the victim normally stay, have also rushed to the Malliga hospital where the
deceased was first taken for treatment. PW9, the Medical Officer attached
to the Malliga hospital has clearly stated that at 03.45 pm, the deceased was
brought to the hospital and it was informed that he was attacked by a person.
In this regard, Exs.P6 and P7 were marked. PW10, the Medical Officer
attached to the Government Hospital has also stated that the deceased was
brought dead. The above evidences are spontaneous and there were no
infirmities in their evidences. There was no reason whatsoever established
for false implication of the accused and PWs 4 and 5, who also belong to
that place, have stated that they have seen the deceased injured and taken to
the hospital and PW3's evidence clearly indicate that the accused beat the
deceased and ran way from the place of occurrence. Further PWs 1 and 2's
evidence clearly establish that only when they were in search of a hotel,
there arose a quarrel due to which the accused beat the deceased. Their
evidence clearly prove that the accused has caused the injury. The evidence
of PWs 9 and 10, the Medical Officer, who has seen the external injuries,
also spoken substantially in favour of the prosecution. Post-mortem
conducted on the deceased clearly proves that in fact the single injury
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
caused on the head was a fatal which resulted in the death of the deceased.
Therefore, there are evidences and FIR has also been registered without any
delay. In fact PW14 – Abdul Raheem translated the statement of PW1 from
Hindi to Tamil.
13. It is relevant to note that accused and the deceased were totally
unconnected and PWs 1 and 2 and deceased came to Coimbatore only for
sale of blankets and were staying in the lodge owned by PW6 and that after
selling the blanket, they were in search of a hotel, there ensued a quarrel
between the deceased and accused, as a result, a single injury was caused on
the head of the deceased. Though their evidence did not indicate that there
was a quarrel between the deceased and the accused for some time, the fact
remains that the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 did not indicate what was the
nature of conversation took place. It is stated that they have not clearly
heard what was the nature of the conversation. The same clearly indicate
that there were some quarrel between the deceased and the accused which
led to the single blow on the head. Therefore, we are of the view that as
there is no enmity whatsoever between the accused and the deceased. The
occurrence took place suddenly when the deceased and PWs 1 and 2 had
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
conversation in Hindi which resulted in the single blow. The accused did
not carry any weapon and he just picked up M.O.1 from the place and hit
the deceased and ran away. Therefore, he has not taken any undue
advantage or acted in a cruel and unusual manner. As the entire occurrence
took place due to the misunderstanding of language, we are of the view that
act of the accused would certainly fall within the meaning of the culpable
homicide not amounting to murder. Any act causing death is committed
with the intention of causing death or of causing bodily injury likely to
cause death will fall under Section 304 (i) IPC.
14. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the
case and in view of the above discussions, this Court is of the opinion that
the conviction and sentence passed by the Court below requires
modification, as the facts of the present case clearly fall under Exception 1
to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code and the appellant is convicted for
“culpable homicide not amounting to murder”. Accordingly, we modify the
conviction as one under Section 304 (i) of the Indian Penal code as the act
of the accused was not with intent to cause death. The intention can be
gathered from the seat of injury. The appellant/accused is convicted under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
Section 304(i) of IPC and not under 304(ii) of IPC and he is sentenced to
undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 10 years, instead of life
imprisonment.
15. The conviction and sentence passed by the Court below
dated 07.01.2019 in S.C.No.177 of 2018, is modified to the above extent
and accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is allowed in part. It is made clear
that the appellant shall be entitled for set off in accordance with Section 428
of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the period of detention already
undergone by him. The appellant is directed to immediately surrender
before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate and on such surrender, the
appellant shall be confined in jail to undergo the remaining period of
sentence, if any. It is made clear that if the appellant fails to surrender
before the concerned Court, the respondent police shall secure the appellant
and produce him before the Magistrate and thereafter, he shall be confined
to the prison.
(N.S.K,J.,) (M.J.R,J.,)
04.11.2025
Index: Yes / No
Internet: Yes / No
gpa
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
To:
1. I Additional District and Sessions Judge
Coimbatore
2. The Inspector of Police,
D-4, Kuniyamuthur Police Station
Kuniyamuthur, Coimbatore
Coimbatore District
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
N.SATHISH KUMAR,J.
AND
M.JOTHIRAMAN,J.
gpa
04.11.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2025 06:07:47 pm )
