[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Navaneethakrishnan vs The Inspector Of Police on 18 March, 2026
Author: N.Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N.Anand Venkatesh
Crl. A(MD)No.1037 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RESERVED ON : 16.03.2026
PRONOUNCED ON : 18.03.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL
Crl. A(MD)No.1037 of 2023
Navaneethakrishnan : Appellant(s)
Vs.
The Inspector of Police,
Thalaiyuthu Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
Cr.No.145/2017. : Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 372 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, to call for records from the lower court in S.C.No.
780 of 2017 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge Magalir
Neethimandram, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District in S.C.No.780 of 2017
dated 27.02.2023 and 28.02.2023 by acquitting and by allowing the
appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.Kathirvelu
Senior Counsel for
Mr.K. Prabhu
For Respondent : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
1/17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
Crl. A(MD)No.1037 of 2023
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was
delivered by N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.)
The sole accused has assailed the judgment of the learned Sesions
Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram, Tirunelveli, in S.C.No.780 of 2017,
dated 27.02.2023, wherein the accused has been convicted and sentenced
in the following manner.
Provision under which Sentence
convicted
Sec. 341 of IPC One month rigorous imprisonment.
Sec. 302 of IPC Life imprisonment and fine of Rs.
10,000/-, in default to undergo 6
months simple imprisonment.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Pooranavalli
had converted herself into a Christian and she along with her daughter
Usha were participating in the prayer meetings conducted by one Joshua
Immanuvel Raja. The said Usha got acquaintance with the sister of the
accused, namely Anushya. The said Usha and Anushya are said to have
attended the prayer meetings conducted by Pastor Joshua Immanuvel
Raja. The said Joshua Immanuvel Raja is said to have sexually assaulted
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
the said Anushya and Usha and had also cheated both of them by getting
jewellery from them. Hence, the said Anushya gave a complaint to the
police against the pastor. This issue became sensational and it was
published in the newspaper and media and the said Anushya, not able to
take the humiliation, committed suicide.
3. The further case of the prosecution is that the accused developed
a motive to the effect that the deceased Pooranavalli, was responsible for
the said Anushya ending her life and hence, on 28.05.2017 at about 10.50
hours, when the deceased completed the prayer meeting and was walking
on the road, the accused person is said to have waylaid the deceased and
attacked her with an aruval (MO1) and caused cut injuries as a result of
which the said Pooranavalli died.
4. PW1, who is the son of the deceased and who is an eyewitness
to the incident, gave a complaint (Ex.P1) and on receipt of the same, an
FIR came to be registered in Crime No.145 of 2017 (Ex.P18). The
printed FIR was handed over to the Judicial Magistrate No.3, Tirunelveli,
on 28.05.2017 at about 13.00 hours.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
5. PW14 took up the investigation and went to the scene of
occurrence and prepared the observation mahazar (Ex.P5) and the rough
sketch (Ex.P19). He also recovered the material objects under athatchi
(Ex.A6) in the presence of witnesses. He proceeded further to the
Tirunelveli Government Medical College Hospital and conducted the
inquest in the presence of panchayatdars between 15.00 hours and 17.00
hours and prepared the inquest report (Ex.P20). The investigation officer
had sent the body of the deceased through PW12 for postmortem and
PW8 conducted the postmortem and the postmortem report was marked
as Ex.P8 and the following injuries were recorded:
“THE FOLLOWING ANTE-MORTEM INJURIES
WERE NOTED:
1.An oblique, gaping, heavy cut injury of size 8 × 3 cm
× dura matter deep is seen over the right parietal region.
It cuts underlying scalp and skull bone.
2.An oblique, gaping cut injury of size 5 × 1 × 1 cm is
seen on the right side of the occipital region, lying 5 cm
behind the right ear. It cuts underlying scalp.
3.An oblique, gaping cut injury of size 6 × 2 × 1 cm lies
5 cm below Injury No. 2. It cuts the underlying soft
tissues.
4.A scratch abrasion of length 5 cm lies 1 cm below
Injury No. 3.
5.A horizontal, heavy cut injury of size 4 × 1 × 1 cm
lies 1 cm below and in front of Injury No. 3, on the
right side of the neck. It cuts the underlying soft tissues.
6.A horizontal, gaping, heavy cut injury of size 10 × 3 ×
3–5 cm is seen on the lower part of the right side of the
neck, lying 3 cm below Injury No. 5. The depth is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
greater at the anterior end. It cuts underlying soft
tissues, vessels, nerves, the 3rd cervical vertebra, and
the spinal cord.
7.A horizontal, gaping, heavy cut injury of size 7 × 1 ×
1–3 cm lies on the upper part of the right side of the
back, 3 cm below Injury No. 6. It cuts underlying soft
tissues and has a tail of size 4 cm in its medial end.
8.A horizontal, gaping, heavy cut injury of size 8 × 1 ×
1–3 cm lies on the back of the right shoulder, 2 cm
lateral to Injury No. 7. It has a tail of length 2 cm in its
medial end and cuts underlying soft tissues.
9.A horizontal, gaping, heavy cut injury of size 8 × 2 ×
4–7 cm lies on the back of the right side of the chest, 5
cm below Injury No. 7. It cuts underlying soft tissues
and the back of the right scapula bone. The injury is
deeper at its outer edge and has a tail of length 3 cm in
its medial end.
10.An oblique, gaping, heavy cut injury of size 7 × 2 ×
2 cm lies on the top of the right shoulder. It cuts
underlying soft tissues.
11.A contusion of size 3 × 2 cm seen over the top of the
left shoulder.
12.An oblique, gaping cut injury of size 6 × 1 × 1 cm
lies on the back of the left hand at the base of the
fingers. It cuts underlying soft tissues and bones.
ON DISSECTION OF HEAD:
Marked subarachnoid haemorrhage is noted over the
right temporo-parietal region.”
6. The accused person was arrested and based on the admissible
portion of his confession, MO1 and MO8 were seized under athatchi
(Ex.P4).
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
7. After recording the statements of witnesses under Section 161 of
CrPC and after collecting all the materials, the police report came to be
filed before the Judicial Magistrate No.3, Tirunelveli and after serving
copies to the accused under Section 207 of CrPC, the case was
committed to the file of the Sessions Court, Mahalir Neethimandram,
Tirunelveli, which was taken on file in S.C. No.78 of 2017.
8. The trial court framed the charges for offences under Sections
341, 294(b) and 302 of IPC and the accused person denied the charges.
9. The prosecution examined PW1 to PW14, marked Exhibits P1
to P21 and relied upon MO1 to MO11.
10. The incriminating circumstances and the evidence was put to
the accused under Section 313 of CrPC and he denied the same as false.
11. The accused person did not examine any witness nor relied
upon any documents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
12. The trial court, on considering the facts and circumstances of
the case and on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, came to
the conclusion that the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable
doubts and accordingly convicted and sentenced the accused person in
the manner stated supra. Aggrieved by the same, the present criminal
appeal has been filed before this Court.
13. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on
either side and the materials available on record.
14. The crux of the arguments on the side of the appellant is that
the prosecution has not examined Usha, who is the daughter of the
deceased, in order to prove the motive behind the crime and that PW1
and PW2, who are said to be the eyewitnesses, happen to be the sons of
the deceased and their evidence is highly doubtful in the absence of any
corroboration by independent witnesses. In the alternative, it was
submitted that even if the case of the prosecution is taken as it is, the case
in hand has to be brought under Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC, since
the murder was committed under sustained provocation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
15. The prosecution examined PW1 to PW4 as eyewitnesses. Even
though PW3 and PW4 did not completely support the case of the
prosecution, the evidence of PW1 and PW2 assumes a lot of significance.
16. PW1 is the son of the deceased. He has explained the manner
in which the incident had taken place. He has stated that on 28.05.2017,
when his mother, after attending the prayers, was moving out of the
church in the road, the accused attacked her with MO1 on the head and
neck and she fell down and the deceased was taken in an ambulance to
the hospital, where she was declared brought dead.
17. PW2, who is also the son of the deceased, has tendered
evidence in line with the evidence of PW1.
18. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that PW1 and
PW2 are sons of the deceased and it is unnatural that on seeing the
accused person with the aruval, they did not raise alarm and did not try to
prevent the accused person and if they had really carried the deceased to
the hospital, their clothes must have been stained with blood and this was
not even recovered by the police.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
19. In the considered view of this Court, every witness who
witnesses a gory incident reacts differently. There are some who will
attempt to prevent the incident, there are others who will freeze and
become immobile without taking any action and another category of
person who will run away from the scene of crime. Therefore, each
person behaves differently after seeing an incident. Hence, while testing
the evidence, the Court cannot apply any fixed standards and the case
must be seen in the light of the attending circumstances.
20. The evidence of PW1 and PW2 cannot be discredited merely
on the ground that the blood-stained clothes were not seized by the
police. At the best, it can only result in a defective investigation. What
happened after the incident assumes a lot of importance. Immediately
after the incident, the sons of the deceased had taken the deceased to the
hospital. This has been spoken to by PW13, through whom the Accident
Register has been marked as Ex.P17. On carefully going through the
evidence of PW13 and the contents of Exhibit P17, it is quite clear that
the deceased was taken to the hospital on 28.05.2017 at 11.30 a.m. The
name of PW1 has also been mentioned as Durai as the person who
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
brought the body of the deceased and his relationship is mentioned as
son. There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of PW13 and the
accident register marked as Ex.P17.
21. It is also relevant to take note of the evidence of PW14, who
stated that on 28.05.2017 at about 11.30 a.m., the Sub-Inspector of Police
received information from the hospital and had gone to the hospital and
received the complaint from PW1. The FIR was registered at 12.30
hours. The FIR has reached the Court on the same day at about 13.00
hours and which has been spoken to by PW10.
22. It is seen that Section 161 statement of PW1, which was
recorded on 28.05.2017, reached the Court the very next day and
therefore, there is no question of deliberation and cooking up a false case
by the prosecution. Section 161 statement recorded by PW2 has also
reached the Court on 30.05.2017.
23. Apart from that, the evidence of the postmortem doctor PW8
and the injuries recorded in the postmortem report (Ex.P8) corroborates
the evidence of the ocular witnesses of PW1 and PW2.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
24. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant
submitted that the motive aspect has not been proved by the prosecution
and there cannot be any motive for the appellant to do away with the
deceased since the person who sexually exploited was the pastor of the
church.
25. In a case where the prosecution is able to establish the incident
through eyewitness account, motive takes a back seat. The law on this
issue is now too well settled. However, in the instant case, PW1 to PW4
have spoken about the motive to the effect that the accused person
strongly felt that the deceased was the one who introduced his sister to
the pastor which led to the sexual abuse and the suicide committed by his
sister. Just because the daughter of the deceased Usha was not examined,
that does not in any way discredit the motive angle that was projected by
the prosecution.
26. The Apex Court has repeatedly held that where the eyewitness
account is natural and is not discredited, certain discrepancies or blemish
committed by the investigation officer during the investigation, cannot be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
a ground to completely wipe out the evidence of witness. Keeping this in
mind, this Court holds that the prosecution has proved the case beyond
reasonable doubts in the light of the evidence of PW1 and PW2, which is
corroborated by PW13 and Ex.P17 and also the evidence of PW8 and
Ex.P8.
27. The next limb of the argument is regarding the invocation of
Exception 1 to Section 300 of IPC.
28. In order to invoke Exception 1 to Section 300, it must be
established that the accused person was deprived of the powers of self-
control by grave and sudden provocation and thereby he has caused the
death of a person. However, this exception itself carves out certain
exceptions in the nature of proviso and states that such provocation must
not be sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender as an excuse for
killing and whether such provocation was under grave or sudden
provocation is a question of fact which has to be decided in each case.
29. In the case in hand, the sister of the accused died more than six
months before the incident. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
even if there is no grave and sudden provocation, sustained provocation
can also come within Exception 1 to Section 300 of IPC and to
substantiate the same, the learned Senior Counsel relied upon the
judgment in Crl.A.1124 of 2022 in the case of Dauvaram Nirmalkar v.
State of Chhattisgarh, dated 02.08.202.
30. The idea behind Exception 1 is to exclude acts of violence
which are not premeditated and not to deny the consideration of
circumstances which resulted in the incident that took place in the past
and subsequently resulting in grave and sudden provocation.
31. The accused person was certainly aggrieved by the fact that his
sister unfortunately got introduced to the pastor by the deceased and she
was sexually abused and it ultimately resulted in her suicide. Probably,
the accused person developed a motive as against the deceased and his
daughter Usha and thought that if his sister had not been introduced by
them to the pastor, she would not have ended her life under unfortunate
circumstances. Even though series of incidents had not taken place
resulting in the provocation, that one incident where the accused person
lost his sister had a lingering effect on the accused person and it
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
sustained itself up to the incident and on the fateful day the accused
person decided to do away with the deceased.
32. The most important question that has to be asked is as to
whether anything happened before the incident which would have
provoked the accused to indulge in a murderous attack on the deceased.
The answer is a clear 'No'. There was only one incident that had taken
place earlier and which is the suicide committed by the sister of the
accused because of the sexual abuse by the pastor which got revealed in
the media. On the date of incident, the deceased was not even aware that
the accused was present in that place and the accused had come to that
place with a clear plan to do away with the deceased. That is the reason
why he came to that place with an aruval (MO1). The deceased did not
do any act which would have provoked the accused person and in fact,
the deceased was attacked by the accused person all of a sudden. In short,
there was no trigger just before the incident which would have revived
the sustained provocation sought to be attributed in favour of the accused
person. Thus, it can only be said that there was voluntary provocation by
the accused as an excuse for killing the deceased. This clearly comes
within the first exception to Exception 1 of Section 300 of IPC. Hence,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
this Court is of the considered view that Exception 1 to Section 300 of
IPC will not have any application in this case.
33. In light of the above discussion, this Court does not find any
ground to interfere with the judgment passed by the learned Sessions
Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram, Tirunelveli District in S.C.No.780 of
2017 dated 27.02.2023 and 28.02.2023 and accordingly, this criminal
appeal stands dismissed.
[N.A.V., J.] [P.D.B., J.]
18.03.2026
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
PKN
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
To
1.The Sessions Judge Magalir Neethimandram, Tirunelveli,
Tirunelveli District.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Thalaiyuthu Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
AND
P.DHANABAL, J.
PKN
Judgment made in
18.03.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 12:25:14 pm )
