Conviction COURT OF  IV ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,  CHENNAI.  Present: Tmt. R.K.P. Tamilarasi, M.L., IV  Additional Sessions Judge. Tuesday,  the 24th  day of March 2026  Sessions Case  No. 304 of 2012 CNR.No. TNCH01- 006554-2012                     IX Metropolitan Magistrate,

IN THE COURT OF  IV ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,  CHENNAI.

 Present: Tmt. R.K.P. Tamilarasi, M.L., IV  Additional Sessions Judge.

Tuesday,  the 24^th  day of March 2026

 Sessions Case  No. 304 of 2012

CNR.No. TNCH01- 006554-2012

                    IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

Preliminary Registered Case No.63 / 2012

1.

Name of the P.S and Crime Number of the offence.

:

The State Rep. by the Inspector of

Police, J-3  Guindy Police Station,

Chennai Crime No.143 of 2012, Offence U/S. 364, 302 r/w 34  IPC.

2.

Name of Accused 1 to 3

:

A1– Naga @ Nagaraj, (Died)

       S/o. Mani

A2- Ganesh @ Ganesan

       S/o. Moorthy

A3- Arul  (Died)  S/o. Balu

3.

Occupation of the 2^nd Accused

:

Auto Driver

4.

Date of Occurrence

:

19.01.2012

5.

Date of Complaint

:

19.01.2012

6.

Date of Apprehension of the

Accused 1 to 3

:

19.01.2012

7.

Date of Released on bail

:

23.04.2012

8.

Date of Commencement of Trial

:

17-09-2012

9.

Date of Closure of Trial

:

08.09.2025

10.

Date of Argument heard

:

03.03.2026

11.

Date of  Judgment

:

24.03.2026

1.  Complainant                                        : The State. Represented by The Inspector of Police,

J-3, Guindy Police Station, Chennai.

2.  Name of the Accused and Address    : A1 – Naga @ Nagaraj, (Died)

       S/o. Mani

A2- Ganesh @ Ganesan

       S/o. Moorthy

       No.41, Kothawalchavadi Street,        Sasthri Nagar, West Saidapet,        Chennai – 600 015.

A3- Arul  (Died)       S/o. Balu

3.  Charges framed against the accused : Charges framed against  the 1^st, 2^nd  and 1, 2 and 3 3^rd  accused U/S. 364 and 302 r/w 34 of

IPC.

Charge abated against the 1^st and 3^rd accused as they were died.

4.  Plea of the 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rd accused    : Pleaded not guilty.

5.The decision of the Court : The prosecution has proved their case against the 2^nd Accused with regard to the offence under Section U/S. 364 and 302 r/w 34 of IPC.

6. Finding of Judge                : 2^ndAccused is found guilty  U/S. 364 and

302 r/w 34 of IPC. During pendency, the 1^st and 3^rd Accused were died. Hence, charges abated against them.

6. Result :    In the result,   the  2^nd  accused is found  guilty under section U/S. 364, 302 r/w 34 of IPC and he is convicted and

sentenced to undergo punishment of Life imprisonment U/S.364 of IPC, and  a fine of Rs.10,000/- imposed on the 2^nd accused, failing which, Two years Rigorous Imprisonment imposed and the 2^nd accused is convicted and sentenced to undergo punishment of Life imprisonment U/S.302 r/w 34 of IPC, and  a fine of Rs.10,000/- imposed on the 2^nd accused failing which, Two years Rigorous Imprisonment  imposed U/S. 235(2) of Cr.P.C. Both sentences shall run concurrently. It is ordered to deduct the period of imprisonment already undergone by the accused  in the prison,

U/S.428 of Cr.P.C.,

       Material Objects M.O.1 to M.O.18 were seized in this case are  ordered to be  destroyed   after the appeal period is over or if appeal is filed after the disposal of appeal.       

Counsel for the Prosecution

: Thiru. T. Ravikumar,

Additional City Public Prosecutor

Counsel for the 2^nd  Accused

: M/s. J.P. Ravi Varman, M. Baskar and M. Lakshmanan

       This Sessions Case came up before me for final hearing on 03.03.2026 in the presence of Tr.T. Ravi Kumar Additional City Public Prosecutor for the State and of

M/s. J.P. Ravi Varman, M.Baskar and M.Lakshmanan Counsels appearing for the 2^nd accused, during pendency, the 1^st and 3^rd Accused are died and hence charges abated against them and upon recording the evidence adduced by the prosecution, upon hearing the arguments from the Counsels appearing for both side and also written argument filed by both sides and upon perusing the documents on record having stood over for consideration till date this Court today delivered the following:-

JUDGMENT

01. The case of the prosecution is that, the Inspector of Police, J-3, Guindy Police Station, Chennai, has filed a final report stating that on 19.01.2012 a person named Shanthi, wife of Mohan, residing at Door No. 2/86, Visakathottam. Saidapet, Chennai, appeared before the station and gave a complaint that she and her family resides at the above said address. She has three children namely eldest daughter Bhavani, second son is Babu and youngest son is Rajasekar @ “Settu.” Settu and

Babu were driving rental autos at the auto stand near Jones Road, close to

Karaneeswarar Pond. Last month, during the Muthumariamman Temple festival at

Gowri Thottam, Saidapet, a wordy quarrel arose between Babu, Settu and Naga @ Nagaraj, Arul and Ganesh, who also drive autos at the same stand. During that  quarrel,  Settu caught  Naga’s  shirt and  humiliated him, due to  which Naga developed anger against Settu @ Rajasekar and Babu. Even on the day of Bhogi, Naga abused her son and threatened him saying that he would finish him. On

18.01.2012 at about 7:00 p.m., Naga and Ganesh went in Arul’s auto came to Babu’s house and told him that everything going to be settled and asked him to come along with them to have some liquor. They took Babu in the auto to Jayaraj Theatre nearby  Mallika Wine Shop, where Naga cut Babut with a knife. Babu escaped from there and informed his mother stating that Naga had cut him with a knife and that they were chasing Settu also. Immediately she rushed to the place, but Naga, Arul and Ganesh were not present. Babu had gone to the hospital after lodging a complaint. They searched throughout the night, but Settu did not return home. On 19.01.2012 at about 8:30 a.m., she came to know that Settu @ Rajasekar had been cut with a knife and was found dead behind the EB Office in the Guindy Estate area. When she went there, she saw her son lying dead with a cut injury on his neck and bleeding. Since the night before the incident, Naga, Arul and Ganesh had chased her son, and she strongly believe that they alone had cut and murdered him and dumped his body there. Therefore, J-3 Guindy police had registered FIR against the accused in Crime No. 143/2012 for the offences U/s 302 of IPC.

02.  The Inspector of Police had filed the final report before the learnedIX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, and he has taken the case on file in P.R.C.No.63/2012 and as the offence under Section 302 of IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate has committed this case after conducting all formalities under Section 209 of Cr.P.C. to the file of the Learned Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai for Trial. After taking cognizance by the Learned Principal Judge, Chennai in S.C.No.304 of 2012 made over this case to this Court for conducting trial and disposing the case according to law.

03.  The accused 1, 2 and 3 had entered into appearance through their Counseland copies of all the documents were furnished to him by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate as per the provision of Section 207 of Cr.P.C.

04.  After perusal of the records and after hearing the Counsels appearing forboth sides, charges were framed U/S.364 and 302 r/w 34 of IPC against the 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rd  accused. When the 1^st, 2^nd and  3^rd Accused were questioned as to the charge framed against them, they had pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried and hence the case was posted for examination of the prosecution side witnesses.

05.  On the side of the prosecution PW1 to PW19 witnesses were examined and

Exhibits P1 to P24 documents were marked and Material Objects M.O.1 to M.O.18 were  marked. No witness was examined and no document was marked on the side of the defence.

06.  The evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses are as follows:. PW1 Mrs. Shanthi, mother of the deceased, deposed in her evidence that, she had three children, namely daughter Bhavani, second son named Babu, and third son named Rajasekaran. The deceased is her younger son Rajasekaran, he was earning his livelihood by driving an Auto. Her second son Babu is also an auto driver and he used to operate auto from the Auto stand situated near Pavalavannan Bridge. There had been frequent quarrel between the three accused and her two sons, during which they repeatedly threaten that no passengers should board her son’s autos. Due to this, there was often quarrel between the accused 1 to 3 and her two sons. In the year of 2012, during the Pongal night, a serious fight occurred between them. Her son called her and said, “The accused 1 to 3 are not allowing me to drive the auto. Please come and talk.” When she went to ask about it, at that time the accused did not come. Subsequently, the accused 1 to 3 came and called her younger son Rajasekaran stating that the matter could be settled amicably. Thereafter, they took her son Rajasekaran from Jeyaraj Theatre and further they also took her son Babu also with them. Later, her son Babu contacted her through phone and informed her that they attacked him and that he was at the police station. He told her to come immediately and save his younger brother Rajasekaran. She immediately went searching everywhere and when she went to the Jafferkhanpet Police Station, there she saw her elder son Babu was there and her younger son was not there. She informed the police that the accused had told her elder son that they are going to kill her son and so Rajasekaran had been taken away and murdered by them. She deposed that the A-1 Nagaraj, A-2 Ganesan and A-3 Arul, the three accused persons had abducted her younger son Rajasekaran. She further deposed that on the next day, in the morning at about 10:00 am., the police informed her that her younger son had been brutally hacked to death at the corner of the drainage near Guindy cremation ground and his body was found at the said place. She gave complaint regarding to it in the J-3 Guindy police station and the complaint was marked as Ex.P-1.

PW2 Mr. Babu (brother of the deceased) deposed in his evidence that, A-1 Nagarajan, A-2 Ganesan and A-3 Arul, the said accused belongs to their auto stand near CB Pavalavannan Subway. All the three accused used to come in a drunken state and pickup quarrel with him and his brother. They also warned them not to operate the auto and criminally intimidated them by stating that if they continued to drive the auto, they would slit the throats of their wives and children. On 15.01.2012, the accused persons threatened them at their auto stand stating that they should not drive their auto. At that time, his younger brother Rajasekaran got angry and scolded Naga. Thereafter, at the same stand, all the three accused had assaulted both him and his brother. At that time, Ganesh initiated the quarrel. Naga and Arul jointly assaulted him. Subsequently, his younger brother Rajasekaran @ Settu caught hold of Naga’s shirt and pushed him on the ground. He further deposed that on 18.01.2012 at about 7.00 p.m. to 7.15 p.m., Ganesh came and stated that the matter could be settled amicably and took him along and immediately called his brother Rajasekaran also along with them. While they were conversing near Jeyaraj

Theatre, at the lane beside Malliga Wine Shop, Arul was speaking, when suddenly Naga cut him with a knife and slit his throat, he immediately pushed him and ran away. At that time, Naga shouted to others to leave Babu and catch his brother Rajasekaran and they started to chase his brother. He further deposed that he rushed to Kumaran Nagar police station and informed his mother regarding the issue through phone. He further deposed that the next day the police called him and asked for his brother’s identification and he told them regarding his brother’s clothes. Later, they informed him that his brother Rajasekaran was found dead behind Guindy EB office. Later he and his mother went to Guindy police station to give complaint.

PW3  Mr. Ravi  deposed in his evidence that, he drives auto from the

Pavalavannan Bridge. Saidapet auto stand. At the same auto stand, Saravanan, Vasanth. Palani, Nagaraj, Dhanapal, Vijay, Settu @ Rajasekar also drive autos. He deposed that there used to be frequent quarrel between Settua Rajasekar and Nagaraj, Ganesan and Arul. There was quarrel between the above said persons at the Muthumariamman temple near the auto stand. On 18.01.2012, when he went to ride and came to the auto stand at around 8pm, he saw Babu, Settu @ Rajasekaran,

Naga, Arul and Ganesan were talking to each other. Later, Arul and Naga took Babu along with them in an auto and Ganesan took Settu @ Rajasekaran in another auto. He further identified the Accused A-1 to A-3. Further, he deposed that after half an hour Nithya wife of Settu @ Rajasekaran came to the auto stand and said that Babu was cut with a knife by Naga and she informed that her husband Settu @ Rajasekaran was missing. He later called Babu’s father and confirmed about the statement of Nithya and his father informed him that Babu was cut with a knife by Naga regarding to it a complaint was given in the police station and Babu was admitted in the hospital. He along with his relatives searched for Settu @

Rajasekaran for the whole night. He further deposed that, the next day when he was with Babu at the hospital, at that time, Babu got a call from the Guindy police station. They informed Babu that a person was found murdered behind the Guindy EB office and asked for his identification. He along with his relatives, his mother and along with Babu’s mother went to the place where the dead body is found. His mother identified the body as Settu @ Rajasekaran

PW-4 Mr. Zaheer Hussain, deposed in his evidence that, on 19-01-2012 at 8.30 am, he went to the EB office near the Guindy Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, at that time he saw crowd had gathered, he found a person lying dead at the spot and Guindy police were also there. He further deposed that the police informed them that an observation mahazar and a rough sketch had to be prepared and asked them to be witnesses. Both him And Murugesan consented to the same. The police inspected the place of occurrence and prepared observation mahazar and rough sketch. In that observation mahazar, both Murugesan and he had signed. The observation mahazar is marked as Ex.P-2. He states that the police collected blood stained mud and blood unstained mud, they also collected blood stained Tarmac and blood unstained Tarmac from the place of occurrence through seizure mahazar.

The seizure mahazar was marked as Ex.P-3. In that he and Murugesan had signed. The blood-stained mud and blood unstained mud is marked as M.O-1 and M.O-2.

PW5 Mr. S. Krishnamurthy, deposed in his evidence that, on 29.01.2012 he went to the Guindy Police Station in connection with his work. At that time, the

Inspector was investigating three persons in connection with a murder case. The three accused gave confession regarding the murder case of Settu @ Rajasekar and the inspector recorded the same. They further stated that, they would identify and hand over the knife and blades used in the commission of the murder and the inspector also recorded the same in that he and Jothi had signed the same. The admitted portion of the confession statement of accused Naga @ Nagaraj is marked as Ex P. 4. and the second signature is his signature. The confession statement of accused Ganesh is marked as Ex P-5. The confession statement of accused Arul is marked as Ex. P-6. Thereafter, he and Jothi accompanied the Inspector along with the accused in a jeep. Behind the BSNL office at Guindy Industrial Estate, near a sewage canal, there was a plastic bag in that a knife with a black handle, two blades without covers, and three blades with covers and blood stains were found in that. The white colour bag is marked as M.O-3, knife is marked as M.O-4, two uncovered blades are M.O-5, three covered blades with blood stains are marked as M.O-6 were all seized through seizure mahazar and the seizure mahazar was marked as Ex.P-7. The accused identified an auto bearing Registration No. TN-09BE-5866 near Singaperumal Koil Tollgate at Guduvanchery. Blood stains were found on the passenger seat as well as on the rear storage area of the auto. The auto was seized through seizure mahazar and the mahazar was marked as Ex.P-8.

PW6 Mr. Kandan, deposed his evidence that, on 19.01.2012 at 8.30am, the J-3 Guindy Police called him to take photo of the dead body found near Guidy industrial EB office sewage canal. He went to the place at 8.45am. he took photo of the dead body found inside the sewage canal and he took photo of the blood stained place surrounded near the sewage. He took the photo in his digital camera, in that he took 8 to 9 photos.

PW7 Mrs. Malar, deposed in her evidence that, she is the owner of the auto bearing TN09BE5866 bought through a loan from IOB Bank and pays monthly instalments properly. In the year of 2012, two days before Pongal she went to her native place at Dindivanam along with her family. She gave her auto for daily rent to Ganesan’s wife Vasantha and the rent amount per day is Rs. 150/- when she came home, she found her auto was missing and Vasanthi, Ganesan was also found missing. When she enquired through her advocate she came to know that her auto was seized by the Guindy police in connection with a murder case. She further identified her auto and she has proper documents for that. The Registration book of the auto bearing number TN09BE5866 and was marked as M.O-7.

PW8 Mr.Sureshkumar has turned hostile but had admitted that the signatures in the confession statement of the accused namely Naga @Nagaraj, Ganesan and

Arul is his signature and also admitted that the signatures in the seizure mahazar of Ex.P-7 and Ex.P-8.

PW9 Mr Elango, has turned hostile but had admitted that he was the head of the auto stand. Dhanapal, Saravanan, Idhayadhulla, Naga @ Nagaraj, Ganesh Babu, Suresh and the deceased Settu @ Rajasekar are drivers at the auto stand. He further identified all the three accused (A-1 to A-3). He further deposed that the accused

1 and 2 always disobeys the rules by not wearing the uniform.

PW10 Jothi has turned hostile but had admitted that the accused were driving auto at that auto stand.

PW11  Mr. Sethuraman,  has turned hostile.

PW12 Mr. Devanesan has deposed in his evidence that, on 18.01.2012, at about 12:15 midnight, while he was present at the police station, one Babu came to the station and stated that when he was coming near Johnse Road, Naga @ Nagaraj, Arul and Ganesan got into the way and abused him using obscene language and picked up quarrel. Among them, Naga assaulted him with a sharp blade knife. As a result, he sustained injuries on his left side of the neck and left hand. They also threatened that they would kill him if he gives complaint at the police station. Thereafter, he ran to the police station and lodged a complaint. Based on the said complaint, a case was registered in R6 Crime No. 93/2012 under Sections 341, 324, 294(b) and 506(ii) of the IPC and since the complainant had sustained injuries, he was sent to the hospital for treatment. During further investigation, while searching for the accused persons, it was found that they were already involved in Crime No. 143/2012 under Section 302 IPC at J-3 Guindy Police Station.

PW13 Mr. Udhayakumar, deposed in his evidence that, on 30.01.2012, while

I was working as an Assistant Analyst at the Forensic Science Laboratory, St.

Thomas Mount, Chennai, at the request of the Guindy Police Inspector in Crime No. 143/2012 he collected bloodstains found on the rear seat (back side) of the auto bearing Registration No. TN 09 BE 5866 using Rexin material. He also collected the bloodstains from the rear seat using bandage cloth. From the rear side of the auto, he recovered a Vinayagar photo and handed it over to the Police Inspector. The Inspector seized the same under Form-95.

PW14  Mr. Francis, deposed in his evidence that, on 19.01.2012, J-3 Guindy

Police Station, Chennai at about 8:40 a.m., he came to know that a person named Settu @ Rajasekar had died, with regard to the murder case, at about 3:00pm, he handed over the body of the deceased to the Government Royapettah Hospital through the doctor named Namuna. On the next day, 20.01.2016, at about 10:00 am., he went along with the Guindy Inspector for conducting the post-mortem and submitted the requisition letter for the same, and identified the dead body at the Government Hospital premises. After completion of the post-mortem, the body was handed over to the deceased’s brother, Babu. At the time of post-mortem, the internal organs provided by the doctor were sealed and kept in four sealed glass containers along with one sealed paper cover, which he handed over for examination to the Forensic laboratory. Further, during the post-mortem, the deceased was found wearing blood stained clothes, namely: a black-coloured pant with bloodstains, a khaki-coloured shirt with bloodstains, a white innerwear with bloodstains, a brown-coloured panty with bloodstains, and a black-coloured belt with bloodstains were collected and handed over to the Inspector at J-3 Guindy Police Station. The Inspector received the same through Form-95. The said material objects were marked as M.O-8, M.O-9, M.O-10, M.O-11, and M.O-12.

PW15  Dr. Karthick, deposed in their evidence that, on 19.01.2012, at about 3:00 pm, while he was working at Royapettah Government hospital in casualty ward, the dead body of a 24-year-old male named Settu @ Rajasekaran. residing at No.86/2, Visakathottam, Saidapet, Chennai-15 was brought by the J-3 Guindy police constable bearing No.20061. Upon confirmation of the death, the body was preserved for post-mortem examination. The AR Copy bearing AR No.4971901 was marked as Ex.P-14.

PW16  Dr. Sathyamoorthy,  had deposed in his evidence that, he conducted the post-mortem and gave report that the person might have died due to shock and hemorrhage because of the cut injury sustained on the neck.

PW17  Mr. Akbar Sait, deposed in his evidence that, he was working as Property Clerk in the Saidapet Court and on 07.02.2012 he handed over the case documents to the  Court relating to the Crime No. 143/2012 of the J-3 Guindy Police station u/s, 302 of IPC.

PW18  Mrs. Vimali Thyagarajan, deposed in her evidence  that,  about the DNA test and upon examination, the said blood sample belong to the ‘A’ blood group. The serology report was marked as Ex.P-17. The blood analysis report was marked as Ex.P-18.

PW19  Mr. Subramanian, Investigation Officer had deposed in his evidence that, in May 2012, while he was on duty at the Saidapet Police Station, on

19.01.2012 at about 8:30 am.. PW-1 came to the station and gave a complaint.

Upon receiving the said complaint, a case was registered at J-3 Guindy Police Station in Crime No.143/2012 under Section 302 IPC and FIR was registered, which was marked as Ex.P-19. The original complaint of PW-1, the FIR, and the station report were forwarded to the Saidapet Hon’ble IX Metropolitan Magistrate Court and copies were sent to the concerned higher officials. After that he took up the case for investigation, on 19.01.2012 at about 8:45 a.m., in the presence of witnesses PW-4 and Murugesan, he inspected the place of occurrence situated behind the EB Office, Thiru-Vi-Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, near the rainwater drain. He deposed that he prepared the Observation Mahazar and Rough Sketch in the presence of the same witnesses. He further conducted inquest upon the body of the deceased named Settu @ Rajasekar before the panchayatar and the witnesses Balu, Pavunammal, Suresh, Thajeedin. Panchatcharam. The inquest report was marked as Ex.P-20. He sent the body of the deceased for post-mortem to the Government Royapettah Hospital through PW-14. On the same day at about 12:15 p.m., in the presence of the observation mahazar witnesses, he seized the blood stained mud which is marked as M.O-1 and blood unstained mud which is marked as M.O-2, blood stained Thar soil which is marked as M.O-3 and blood unstained Thar soil which is marked as M.O-4 from the place of occurrence through seizure mahazar and got signature from the witnesses. Further he investigated all the witnesses and recorded their statements. He further went to the Government

Royapettah Hospital and received the AR Copy which was marked as Ex.P-14. Further he enquired PW-15 and recorded her statement. He further sent the recovered properties to the Hon’ble court through form 91, which was marked as Ex.P-21. On 20.01.2012 he gave requisition letter to PW-16 for post-mortem of the body of the deceased Settu @ Rajasekaran through PW-14. After post-mortem, the body was handed over to the family members of the deceased and further PW-14 handed over the clothes of the deceased namely blood stained black pant which was cut and taken was marked M.O-14, blood stained white colour innerwear which was cut and taken was marked M.O-15, blood stained brown colour panty which was marked as M.O-16. blood stained black colour belt which was marked as M.O-17 and recorded the same in form 91 which was marked as Ex.P-22. Later he investigated PW-14 and recorded his statement. He further went to the Government Royapettah Hospital and investigated PW-16 and recorded his statements. The post mortem report given by him was marked as Ex.P-15. On the same day, he received information that all the three accused were surrendered before the Hon’ble XIII

MM Court, Egmore and was sent to the Central prison as per the order of the Hon’ble XIII MM Court. Egmore. Further on 23.01.2012, he filed a petition before the Hon’ble IX MM Court, Saidapet to take custody of the accused for investigation and he got an order that the accused can be kept in police custody till 31.01.2012 and he took all the three accused to J-3 Guindy Police station. On 29.01.2012 he recorded the confession statement of the accused Naga @ Nagaraj in the presence of PW-8 and PW-5. The admitted portion of the confession statement was already recorded as Ex.P-4. He further investigated the accused Ganesan and Arul and recorded their confession statements in the presence of the same witnesses. As per the confession statement of all the three accused, he went to the Guindy Thiru Vi Ka Industrial BSNL opposite sewage canal, he seized the plastic cover which was marked as M.O-3, blood stained black coloured knife which was marked as M.O-4, blood stained 2 uncovered Supermax blade which was marked as MO-5, blood stained 3 covered Supermax blade which was marked as MO-6 were seized through seizure mahazar in the presence of PW-5 and PW-8. The MaterialObjects 1 to 6 were identified by the accused. On the same day, in the presence of the same witnesses he further seized the auto bearing No. TN 09 BE 5866 Yellow colour auto near NH-45 National Highways Singaperumal temple tollgate as shown by the accused. He found blood stained at the backseat and at the back where things will be placed were also found with blood stains. Further after he came to the station he prepared Form 91 and sent to the case properties to the Court. The Form 91 is marked as Ex.P-23. He further investigated PW-5 and PW-8 and recorded their statements. He further investigated PW-11, PW-7 and recorded their statements. He further with the help of PW-13 collected the blood stains from the auto through Rexin material and bandage cloth, seized the Vinayagar photo from the back seat of the auto. The Form 91 was marked as Ex.P-24 and the piece of the Rexin is marked as M.O-18 and investigated PW-13 and recorded his statement. Further he sent the case properties through form 91 to the Hon’ble Court and also surrendered the accused before the Court. Further on 06.02.2012 he investigated PW-17 and recorded his statements. He investigated PW-16 and PW-18 and recorded their statements. After completion of the investigation, he prepared charge sheet against the accused 1 to 3 for the offences u/s. 364, 302 r/w 34 of IPC.

07.         After examination of PW1 to PW19, the prosecution evidence was closed by the Additional City Public Prosecutor.  When the 1^st, 2^nd and  3rd  accused were questioned u/s. 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. as incriminating evidence against them read over to them, they denied the same as false. During pendency of the Defense side witness, the 1^st accused Naga @ Nagaraj  and the 3^rd accused  Arul are reported died. Hence, charge abated as against the 1^st  and  3^rd  accused.  On the side of the 2^nd accused, no witness examined and no document was marked.

08.         .  Point for determination :-

Whether the prosecution has proved their case against the 2^nd accused beyond all reasonable doubt or not, is the question to be decided in this case?

09.         Point for consideration:

The learned Additional City Public Prosecutor argued that, the prosecution has examined  PW1 to PW19 witnesses and Ex.P1 to P24 documents were marked and 18 Material Objects (M.O.1 to M.O.18 ) were marked. On the side of the defense, no witness was exmained and no document was marked. The prosecution witnesses  deposed about the  previous enmity between the Accused 1 to 3 and the deceased Rajasekar @ Settu and his brother Babu (PW2) and narrated  about the above said  murder was committed by the Accused 1 to 3 and Doctors’ and Forensic Science Experts opinion/evidence confirmed that the said occurrence was committed by the Accused 1 to 3.  After completion of U/S.313 (1)(b) Cr.P.C.

Questioning, during pendency of the Defense side witness, the 1^st accused Naga @ Nagaraj  and the 3^rd accused  Arul are reported died, hence, charge abated as against the 1^st  and  3^rd  accused. The charges against the 2^nd accused   U/s.364, 302 r/w 34 IPC  have been proved beyond all reasonable doubt by producing cogent and convincing evidence and proved the guilt of the 2^nd accused  beyond reasonable doubt and he prayed the court to found guilty and punish the 2^nd  accused by awarding maximum punishment.

10.         On the contrary, the learned counsel for the 2^nd  accused has  argued that the above said occurrence was not took place and the accused was not involved in the above said offence and the 2^nd accused is falsely implicated in this case. Further argued that, PW1 stated in her evidence that, her two sons were driving  Autos in Two Auto Stands, that both Auto Stand drivers  made an objection for this and there was  a enmity between the Auto Stand Drivers and the Victim and Babu. Further, there was money dispute between the  deceased Rajasekar, Babu and Auto owners. The victim and Babu were not paying their rent to the Auto Owners, hence there was a police complaint against them by the Auto Owners. Like wise, Victim and Babu residing separately in the rented house on the next street of PW1. There was also a dispute between the House Owners and PW1’ sons for not paying the rent. Further, the Victim and his brother had also been approached by a few money lenders on multiple occasion to retrieve their money.  Hence, the counsel for the 2^nd accused argued that there was a previous enmity between  the victim, his brother and several persons, hence, the murder would have been committed by some other persons. The 2^nd accused is no way connected with the occurrence. On the date of occurrence 18.01.2012, at 7.00 p.m.,  PW2 Babu’s got injuries in his  throat and ran away and rushed to R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station and gave a police complaint and registered the FIR No.93/2012.  The Investigating Officer deposed that the victim was picked by the Accused 1 to 3 at the Jayaraj Theatre near Wine

Shop through his investigation. The wine shop comes under the Jurisdiction of R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station. But the deceased Rajasekar @ Settu body was recovered from the behind the Guindy Industrial Estate Canal. Hence, whether the occurrence has been took place within the jurisdiction of Kumaran Nagar Police

Station or Guindy Police Station is not properly established by the prosecution side. Further, argued that Confession witness PW5 stated in his evidence that,  he along with another witness namely Jothi signed in the confession statement of the Accused 1 and 2 and seizure mahazars. But, on perusal of the above said documents, Jothi was not singed as a witnesses. Hence, PW5’ evidence is not reliable and worthy.  PW8, PW9, PW10 and PW11 were turned Hostile and their evidences were not supported to the prosecution side. The learned counsel for the 2^nd  accused has further  argued that, there was a discrepancies in their testimonies raise serious doubts about the credibility of the witnesses involved.  There is lot of discrepancies found in respect of recording the confessional statement of the accused 1 and 2 and the material objects have not been collected in the presence of the accused after recording the same.The evidence of the prosecution entire case have been manipulated for ulterior motives especially, this 2^nd accused is innocent and there is no prima facie case made out against him and the 2^nd accused may be aquitted from charges.

11.         According to the prosecution, the Inspector of Police, J-3, Guindy Police

Station, Chennai, has filed a final report stating that on 19.01.2012 a person named

Shanthi, wife of Mohan, residing at Door No. 2/86, Visakathottam. Saidapet, Chennai, appeared before the station and gave a complaint that she and her family resides at the above said address. She has three children namely eldest daughter

Bhavani, second son is Babu and youngest son is Rajasekar is called as “Settu.”

Settu and Babu were driving rental autos at the auto stand near Jones Road, close to

Karaneeswarar Pond. Last month, during the Muthumariamman Temple festival at

Gowri Thottam, Saidapet, a wordy quarrel arose between Babu, Settu and Naga @ Nagaraj, Arul and Ganesh, who also drive autos at the same stand. During that quarrel, Settu caught Naga’s  shirt and humiliated him, due to which Naga developed anger against Settu @ Rajasekar and Babu. Even on the day of Bhogi, Naga abused her son and threatened him saying that he would finish him. On

18.01.2012 at about 7:00 p.m., Naga and Ganesh went in Arul’s auto came to Babu’s house and told him that everything going to be settled and asked him to come along with them to have some liquor. They took Babu in the auto to Jayaraj Theatre nearby  Mallika Wine Shop, where Naga cut Babut with a knife. Babu escaped from there and informed his mother stating that Naga had cut him with a knife and that they were chasing Settu also. Immediately she rushed to the place, but Naga, Arul and Ganesh were not present. Babu had gone to the hospital after lodging a complaint. They searched throughout the night, but Settu did not return home. On 19.01.2012 at about 8:30 a.m., she came to know that Settu @ Rajasekar had been cut with a knife and was found dead behind the EB Office in the Guindy Estate area. When she went there, she saw her son lying dead with a cut injury on his neck and bleeding. Since the night before the incident, Naga, Arul and Ganesh had chased her son, and she strongly believe that they alone had cut and murdered him and dumped his body there. Therefore, J-3 Guindy police had registered FIR against the accused in Crime No. 143/2012 for the offences U/s 302 of IPC.

12.          The prosecution has examined 19 witnesses.  PW1 is the mother of the deceased Rajasekar @ Settu. PW2 Babu, brother of the deceased. The  mother of the deceased examined as PW1 Mrs. Shanthi, deposed that, she had three children, namely daughter Bhavani, second son named Babu, and third son named

Rajasekaran. The deceased Rajasekaran is her younger son, and her second son Babu, are auto drivers and they used to operate auto from the Auto stand situated near Pavalavannan Bridge, near Johnes Road, Saidapet.  There had been frequent quarrel between the three accused Naga @ Nagarajan, Ganesh and Arul and her two sons, during which they repeatedly threaten that no passengers should board her son’s autos. In the year 2012, during the Pongal night, a serious fight occurred between them. Her son called her and said, “The accused 1 to 3 are not allowing me to drive the auto. Please come and talk.” When she went to ask about it, at that time the accused did not come. Subsequently, the accused 1 to 3 came and called her younger son Rajasekaran stating that the matter could be settled amicably.

Thereafter, they took her son Rajasekaran from Jeyaraj Theatre and further they also took her son Babu also with them. Later, her son Babu contacted her through phone and informed her that they attacked him and that he was at the police station. He told her to come immediately and save his younger brother Rajasekaran. She immediately went searching everywhere and when she went to the Jafferkhanpet Police Station, there she saw her elder son Babu was there and her younger son was not there. She informed the police that the accused had told her elder son that they are going to kill her son and so Rajasekaran had been taken away and murdered by them. She deposed that the A-1 Nagaraj, A-2 Ganesan and A-3 Arul, the three accused persons had abducted her younger son Rajasekaran. She further deposed that on the next day, in the morning at about 10:00 am., the police informed her that her younger son had been brutally hacked to death at the corner of the drainage near Guindy cremation ground and his body was found at the said place.  In this regard, She gave complaint before the J-3 Guindy police station and the complaint was marked as Ex.P-1. PW1 is the complainant and she saw her son Babu was got injuries in his throat due to assault made by the Accused 1 to 3. PW1 is the circumstantial evidence.

13.          On her evidence, it reveals that, there was a previous enmity between hertwo sons and Accused 1 to 3 with regard to the driving the Auto in Two Auto Stands. In this regard,  at the time of occurrence, the direct eyewitness and injured examined as PW2 Babu, who is the brother deceased Rajasekar. PW2 deposed in his chief examination that,

@ஜனவரி மாதம் 15ஆம் தேததி 2012 அன்றை க்கு எங்கறை ஆட்தே ா ஸ்தே ன்டில் வண்டி ஓட் க்கூ ாது என்று ச&ால்லி ஸ்தே ன்டில் றைவத்து மிரட்டினார்கள். அப்ச/ாழுது, என் தம்பிக்கு தேகா/ம் வந்து  நாகாறைவ திட்டினான். அதேத ஸ்தே ன்டில் றைவத்து எங்கள் 2தே/றைரயும் ஆஜர் எதிரிகள் மூன்றுதே/ருமாக தே&ர்ந்து அடித்தார்கள்.  நானும், தம்பியும் அம்மனுக்கு தீ மிதிக்க மாறை: தே/ாட்டிருந்தேதாம். அப்தே/ாது கதே;ஷ் &ண்றை வளித்தார். நாகா, அருள் 2தே/ருமாக தே&ர்ந்து என்றைன அடித்தார்கள். என் தம்பி ராஜதே&கரன் (எ) தே&ட்டு நாகாறைவ &ட்றை றைAப் பிடித்து தள்ளிவிட் ான். 18.01.2012 அன்று இரவு 07.00 அல்:து 07.15 மணிக்கு கதே;&ன் வந்து, வா, &மர&மாக தே/ாயி :ாம் என்று ச&ால்லி என்றைன கூட்டிக்சகாண்டு தே/ானார்கள். உ தேன என் தம்பியும், கதே;&ன் வா தே/&:ாம் என்று ச&ால்லி கூட்டிட்டு வந்தான். தே/சிக்சகாண்டிருக்கும்தே/ாது, சஜAராஜ் திதேAட் ர் மல்லிகா ஒயின்ஸ் ஷாப் &ந்துகிட் வரும்தே/ாது அருள் தே/சிக்கிட்டு இருந்தார். நாகா கத்திAால் என்றைன சதாண்றை யிதே:தேA அறுத்துவிட் ான். நான் தட்டிவிட்டுட்டு ஓடிட்தே ன். அப்தே/ாது நாகா இவன விடு, அவன் தம்பிறைA பிடி என்று ச&ான்னான். தம்பிறைA துரத்திகிட்டு தே/ாயிட் ாங்க. குமரன் நகர் காவல் நிறை:Aத்திற்கு ஓடிட்தே ன். அம்மாவுக்கு இந்த விவரத்றைத நான் தே/ான் மூ:மாக ச&ான்தேனன். நான் புகார் சகாடுத்துவிட்டு ஆஸ்/த்திரிக்கு ச&ன்றுவிட்தே ன். மறுநாள் காறை:யிதே: எனக்கு தே/ான் /ண்ணி தம்பிதேAா அறை Aா ம் தேகட் ார். நான் உ தேன என்தம்பி தே/ாட்டிருந்த உறை சAல்:ாம் ச&ான்தேனன். என் தம்பி கிண்டி E.B. ஆபிஸுக்கு பின்னாடி இ ந்துகி க்கி ான் என்று ச&ான்னார், என்றைன ராAப்தே/ட்றை க்கு தே/ாக ச&ான்னார்கள்”.

From the above evidence, it came to know that before the date of occurrence, there was a serious quarrel between the Accused 1 to 3 and PW1’s two sons about the Auto Stand and Muthumari Amman Temple Festival. In this regard, On 18.01.2012 at about 07.00 pm., the 2^nd Accused   Ganesh came and told that the matter could be settled amicably and immediately called his brother Rajasekaran and took them along with the 2^nd Accused. While they were in conversation near Jeyaraj Theatre, Lane besides Malliga Wine Shop, Arul was speaking, suddenly Naga cut PW2’s throat with knife,  PW2 Babu pushed the accused and ran away from the occurrence place. At that time, the accused Naga shouted to others to leave Babu and catch his brother Rajasekaran. Immediately, PW2 Babu rushed to the R-6 Kumaran Nagar Police Station and lodged a complaint and FIR has been registered in Crime No.93/2012 U/S. 341, 324, 294(b), 506(ii) of IPC, and informed his mother PW1 regarding the issue through phone. Since PW2 Babu  had sustained injuries, he was sent to the Hospital for treatment.

14.          After getting information from PW2, his mother PW1 rushed to the occurrence place that is near Jeyaraj Theater, Lane besides Malliga Wine Shop, she searched her younger Rajasekaran but he was not there and the accused 1 to 3 were also not there. After that, PW1 came to the Kumaran Nagar Police Station and there she saw her elder son Babu was there and her younger son was not there. She informed the police that the accused had told her elder son that they are going to kill her son and Rajasekaran had been taken away and murdered by them.  They searched throughout the Night, but Rajasekaran did not return home. She came to know that, her younger son Rajasekaran had been kidnapped by  the three accused persons. On next day, 19.01.2012 at about 08.30 am., the police informed her that her younger son had been brutally hacked to death at the corner of the drainage near Guindy cremation ground and his body was found at the said place.

 She lodged a  complaint before J-3 Guindy police station and the complaint was marked as Ex.P-1.

15.          After receiving the complaint on 19.01.2012 at about 08.30 A.M., the

Investigating Officer PW19 registered the FIR Ex.P19 in Crime No.143/2012 U/S.302 IPC as against the accused 1 to 3. The three accused  name was found in the FIR. Immediately,  the complaint and FIR, were forwarded to the Saidapet Hon’ble IX Metropolitan Magistrate Court. The Investigating Officer PW19 took the case on hand for investigation and on 19.01.2012 at about 8:45 a.m., in the presence of witnesses PW-4 and Murugesan, he inspected the place of occurrence situated behind the EB Office, Thiru-Vi-Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, near the rainwater drain and he prepared the Observation Mahazar Ex.P2 and Rough Sketch in the presence of the same witnesses. He further conducted inquest upon the body of the deceased named Settu @ Rajasekar before the panchayatar and the witnesses Balu, Pavunammal, Suresh, Thajeedin. Panchatcharam. The inquest report was marked as Ex.P-20. He sent the body of the deceased for post-mortem to the Government Royapettah Hospital through PW-14. On the same day at about 12:15 p.m., in the presence of the observation mahazar witnesses, he seized the blood stained mud which is marked as M.O-1 and blood unstained mud which is marked as M.O-2, blood stained Thar soil which is marked as M.O-3 and blood unstained Thar soil which is marked as M.O-4 from the place of occurrence through seizure mahazar and got signature from the witnesses.

16.          PW3  Mr. Ravi  deposed in his evidence that, he drives auto from the

Pavalavannan Bridge. Saidapet auto stand. At the same auto stand, Saravanan,

Vasanth. Palani, Nagaraj, Dhanapal, Vijay, Settu @ Rajasekar also drive autos.

PW3 deposed in his chief examination that,

   “/வ வண்;ன்  /ா:ம், றை&தாப்தே/ட்றை ஆட்தே ா ஸ்தே ன்டில் உள் தே&ட் (எ) ராஜதே&கர் என்/வருக்கும், நாகராஜ், கதே;ஷ், அருள் ஆகிதேAார்களுக்கிறை தேA அடிக்கடி சிறுசிறு தகராறுகள் ஏற்/டும். ஆட்தே ா ஸ்தே ன்டின் அருகில்  உள் முத்துமாரி அம்மன் தேகாவில் திருவிழாவில் தேமற்ச&ான்ன 2தே/ருக்குள் தகராறு ந ந்தது. 18.01.2012 ஆம் தேததி புதன்கிழறைம நான் &வாரி ச&ன்றுவிட்டு ஆட்தே ா ஸ்தே ண்டுக்கு வரும்தே/ாது இரவு 8.00 மணி இருக்கும். நான் வரும்தே/ாது /ாபு, தே&ட் மற்றும் நாகா, அருள், கதே;&ன் ஆகிதேAார் தே/சிக்சகாண்டிருந்தார்கள்.  அதன்பி கு /ாபுறைவ அறைழத்துக்சகாண்டு அருளும், நாகாவும் ஆட்தே ாவில் ச&ன் ார்கள்.  இன்சனாரு ஆட்தே ாவில் தே&ட்(எ)ராஜதே&கறைர, கதே;ஷ் என்/வர் அறைழத்துச்ச&ன் ார்.  இன்று நீதிமன் த்தில் ஆஜராகியுள் எதிரிகளில் முதல் எதிரி நாகா (எ) நாகராஜன், 2வது எதிரி கதே;&ன், 3வது எதிரி அருள்  இவர்கள் தான் அறைழத்து ச&ன் ார்கள்.  தே&ட் (எ) ராஜதே&கரின் மறைனவி நித்Aா /ாபுறைவ, நாகா என்/வர் சவட்டி விட் தாகவும், தனது க;வர் தே&ட் (எ) ராதேஜதே&கர் கா;வில்றை: என்றும் என்னி ம் ச&ான்னார். நானும், எனது உ வினர்களும், எனது அம்மாவும் தே&ட் (எ) ராஜதே&கறைர இரவு முழுவதும் தேதடிதேனாம். மறுநாள் காறை: 8.00 மணிA வில் நான் /ாபுவு ன் மருத்துவமறைனயில் இருக்கும்தே/ாது /ாபுவின் தே/ானிற்கு கிண்டி காவல் நிறை:Aத்தில் இருந்து தே/ானில் கூப்பிட் ார்.  கிண்டி EB ஆபிஸின் பின்பு ம் ஒருவறைர சவட்டி இருப்/தாகவும், அவர் ராஜதே&கறைர தே/ால் இருப்/தாகவும், அறை Aா ம் தேகட் ார்கள். நாங்கள் அறை Aா ம் ச&ான்தேனாம். எனது உ வினர்கள், எனது அம்மா, மற்றும் /ாபுவின் அம்மா எல்தே:ாரும்  பிதேரதம் கிறை த்த இ த்திற்கு அறை Aா ம் காட் தே/ாதேனாம். அங்கு, இ ந்து கி ந்த ந/ர் தே&ட் (எ) ராஜதே&கர் என்று எனது அம்மா அறை Aா ம் ச&ான்னார்.”

He deposed that they used to be frequent quarrel between Settu @ Rajasekar and Nagaraj, Ganesan and Arul. There was quarrel between the above said persons at the Muthumari Amman temple near the auto stand. On 18.01.2012, when he went to ride and came to the auto stand at around 8pm, he saw Babu, Settu @

Rajasekaran, Naga, Arul and Ganesan were talking to each other. Later, Arul and Naga took Babu along with them in an auto and Ganesan took Settu @ Rajasekaran in another auto. He further identified the Accused A-1 to A-3. Further, he deposed that after half an hour Nithya wife of Settu @ Rajasekaran came to the auto stand and said that Babu was cut with a knife by Naga and she informed that her husband Settu @ Rajasekaran was missing. He later called Babu’s father and confirmed about the statement of Nithya and his father informed him that Babu was cut with a knife by Naga regarding to it a complaint was given in the police station and Babu was admitted in the hospital. He along with his relatives searched for Settu @ Rajasekaran for the whole night. He further deposed that, the next day when he was with Babu at the hospital, at that time, Babu got a call from the Guindy police station. They informed Babu that a person was found murdered behind the Guindy EB office and asked for his identification. He along with his relatives, his mother and along with Babu’s mother went to the place where the dead body is found. His mother identified the body as Settu @ Rajasekaran

17.         From the above evidence, it clearly proved that on the date of occurrenceon 18.01.2012, at 07.00 p.m, all the three accused kidnapped the Rajasekaran and

Babu through the Auto and picked up them to the Jeyaraj Theater Lane  behind Malliga Wine Shop and they have quarreled with each other. Suddenly,  Naga @ Nagaraj cut Babu’s throat with a knife and he pushed them and ran away from that place and he rushed to the R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station and gave complaint.

At that time, All the three accused took the Rajasekaran through the Auto bearing Regn.No.TN-09-BE-5866 and the same is marked as M.O.7. The auto owner is examined as PW7 and she deposed that she is the owner of the auto bearing TN09BE5866 bought through a loan from IOB Bank and pays monthly instalments properly. In the year of 2012, two days before Pongal she went to her native place at Dindivanam along with her family. She gave her auto for daily rent to Ganesan’s wife Vasantha and the rent amount per day is Rs. 150/- when she came home, she found her auto was missing and Vasanthi, Ganesan was also found missing. When she enquired through her advocate she came to know that her auto was seized by the Guindy police in connection with a murder case. She further identified her auto and she has proper documents for that.

18.         The observation mahazar witness  PW-4 Mr. Zaheer Hussain, deposed that, on 19-01-2012 at 8.30 am, he went to the EB office near the Guindy Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, at that time he saw crowd had gathered, he found a person lying dead at the spot and Guindy police were  prepared observation mahazar and a rough sketch and asked them to sign as witnesses. Both PW4 and  Murugesan signed as witnesses. The observation mahazar is marked as Ex.P-2. The police collected blood stained mud and blood unstained mud, is marked as M.O-1 and

M.O-2 they also collected blood stained Tarmac and blood unstained Tarmac from the place of occurrence through seizure mahazar. The seizure mahazar was marked as Ex.P-3.  The J-3 Guindy Police called the  photographer, who took  the photo on 19.01.2012 at 8.30am, on the dead body found near Guindy industrial EB office sewage canal examined as PW6. He took 8 to 9 photos in his digital camera. But, those photos were not marked through the prosecution side.

19.         On 20.01.2012 PW19, Investigation Officer received information that all the three accused were surrendered before the Learned XIII MM Court, Egmore and was sent to the Central prison. Further on 23.01.2012, he filed a petition before the Learned IX MM Court, Saidapet to take custody of the accused for

investigation and he got an order that the accused can be kept in police custody till

31.01.2012 and he took all the three accused to J-3 Guindy Police station. On 29.01.2012 he recorded the confession statement of the accused Naga @ Nagaraj in the presence of PW-8 Suresh Kumar and PW-5 Krishnamoorthy.  The admitted portion of the confession statement was already recorded as Ex.P-4. He further investigated the accused Ganesan and Arul and recorded their confession statements in the presence of the same witnesses. As per the confession statement of all the three accused, he went to the Guindy Thiru Vi Ka Industrial BSNL opposite sewage canal, he seized the plastic cover which was marked as M.O-3, blood stained black coloured knife which was marked as M.O-4, blood stained 2 uncovered Supermax blade which was marked as MO-5, blood stained 3 covered Supermax blade which was marked as MO-6 were seized through seizure mahazar in the presence of PW-5 and PW-8. The Material Objects 1 to 6 were identified by the accused.  On the same day, in the presence of the same witnesses he further seized the auto bearing No. TN 09 BE 5866 Yellow colour auto near NH-45 National Highways Singaperumal temple tollgate as shown by the accused. He found blood stained at the backseat and at the back where things will be placed were also found with blood stains. Further after he came to the station he prepared form 91 and sent to the case properties to the  Court. The Form 91 is marked as Ex.P-23.

20.         PW5 Mr. S. Krishnamurthy, deposed that, on 29.01.2012 he went to the Guindy Police Station in connection with his work. At that time, the Inspector was investigating three persons in connection with a murder case. The three accused gave confession regarding the murder case of Settu @ Rajasekar and the inspector recorded the same and they would identify and hand over the knife and blades used in the commission of the murder and the inspector also recorded the same. The admitted portion of the confession statement of accused Naga @ Nagaraj is marked as Ex P. 4. and the second signature is his signature. The confession statement of accused Ganesh is marked as Ex P-5. The confession statement of accused Arul is marked as Ex. P-6. Along with I.O.,PW-5 and one Suresh  accompanied the

Inspector along with the accused in a jeep and Behind the BSNL office at Guindy Industrial Estate, near a sewage canal, there  was a plastic bag in that a knife with a black handle, two blades without covers, and three blades with covers and blood stains were found in that. The white colour bag is marked as M.O-3, knife is marked as M.O-4, two uncovered blades are M.O-5, three covered blades with blood stains are marked as M.O-6 were all seized through seizure mahazar and the seizure mahazar was marked as Ex.P-7. The accused identified an auto bearing

Registration No. TN-09-BE-5866 near Singaperumal Koil Tollgate at

Guduvanchery. Blood stains were found on the passenger seat as well as on the rear storage area of the auto. The auto was seized through seizure mahazar and it was marked as Ex.P-8.

21.         The counsel for the 2^nd accused argued that,  Confession witness PW5 stated in his evidence that,  he along with another witness namely Jothi signed in the confession statement of the Accused 1 and 2 and seizure mahazars. But, on perusal of the above said documents, Jothi was not singed as a witnesses.  Hence, PW5’ evidence is not reliable and worthy. But on perusal of records, Jothi was not signed as a witness. PW5 corroborated the evidence of PW19 I.O., and in the presence of PW5 and PW8 Suresh Kumar, the accused 1 to 3 gave the confession statement and the Material Objects M.O.3 to M.O.7 for the commission of Offence were recovered from the occurrence place through seizure mahazar. Hence, PW5’s evidence is reliable and trustworthy.

22.         PW-19 deposed that with the help of PW-13 collected the blood stains from the auto through Rexin material and bandage cloth, seized the Vinayagar photo from-the back seat of the auto. The Form 91 was marked as Ex.P-24 and the piece of the Rexin is marked as M.O-18 and he sent the case properties through form 91 to the  Court and also surrendered the accused before the Court. He investigated PW-16 and PW-18 and recorded their statements. After completion of the investigation, he prepared charge sheet against the accused 1 to 3 for the offences u/s. 364, 302 r/w 34 of IPC.

23.         The Investigation Officer, PW19 investigated all the witnesses and recorded their statements. He further went to the Government Royapettah Hospital and enquired PW-15 Dr. Karthick, who confirmed the death of the deceased and received the Accident Register Copy as Ex.P-14. On 20.01.2012 he gave requisition letter to PW-16 for post-mortem of the body of the deceased Settu @ Rajasekaran through PW-14. After post-mortem, the body was handed over to the family members of the deceased and further PW-14 handed over the clothes of the deceased namely blood stained black pant which was cut and taken was marked M.O-14, blood stained white colour innerwear which was cut and taken was marked M.O-15, blood stained brown colour panty which was marked as M.O-16. blood stained black colour belt which was marked as M.O-17 and recorded the same in form 91 which was marked as Ex.P-22. The post mortem report is marked as Ex.P-15.

24.         PW16 Dr.Sathyamoorthy, who has conducted postmortem on 19.01.2012 at Royapettah Government Hospital, Chennai and issued the postmortem certificates as Ex.P15 and noted that, the person might have died due to shock and hemorrhage because of the cut injury sustained on the neck  and also collected the viscera from the deceased body and blood stained clothes of deceased and forwarded them for chemical analysis to the Forensic Sciences Experts PW18 and noted that, about the DNA test and upon examination, the said blood sample belongs to the ‘A’ blood group. The serology report was marked as Ex.P-16.

Detected Blood onch Item 1,3, 5 to 16  (Blood stained small stones, tarred earth, blood stained clothes of deceased that is shirt, banian, trouser, innerwear, leather belt, blood stained knife, blood stained blades (3Nos), Rexin sheet, piece of torn paper). After analysis, the report reveals that the Blood found in the above said Items are human Blood group-A in the Biological Report and the same was marked as Ex.P17. Like wise, the deceased Rajasekar blood group is ‘A’ and the blood analysis report was marked as Ex.P-18.

25.         PW13 Forensic Science Expert deposed that, on 30.01.2012,  at the request of the Guindy Police Inspector in Crime No. 143/2012 he collected bloodstains found on the rear seat (back side) of the auto bearing Registration No. TN 09 BE 5866 using Rexin material. He also collected the bloodstains from the rear seat using bandage cloth. From the rear side of the auto, he recovered a Vinayagar photo and handed it over to the Police Inspector. The Inspector seized the same under Form-95.

26.         PW11 Sethuraman deposed that in his evidence he is running a petty shop and he was selling blade at Guindy Industrial Estate and on 18.01.2012, at about  08.00 p.m.,  somebody came and purchased the blades but he had not seen the accused and turned hostile. Hence, his evidence is not supported to the prosecution case.

27.         As per the evidence of PW16, who conducted postmortem opined that the deceased Rajasekar might have died due to shock and hemorrhage because of the cut injury sustained on the neck and all these injuries are appears to be found in the vital part of the neck and these injuries are sufficient to cause his  death.

28.         The learned counsel for the 2^nd accused argued that, there was a dispute between the House Owners and PW1’ sons for not paying the rent and there was a previous enmity between  the victim, his brother and several persons, like Auto Stand drivers and Auto Owners,  hence, the murder would have been committed by some other persons. The 2^nd accused is no way connected with the occurrence. On the date of occurrence 18.01.2012, at 7.00 p.m.,  PW2 Babu’s got injuries in his throat and ran away and rushed to R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station and gave a police complaint and registered the FIR No.93/2012.  The Investigating Officer deposed that the victim was picked by the Accused 1 to 3 at the Jayaraj Theatre near Wine Shop through his investigation. The wine shop comes under the

Jurisdiction of R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station. But the deceased Rajasekar @

Settu body was recovered from the behind the Guindy Industrial Estate Canal.

Hence, whether the occurrence has been took place within the jurisdiction of Kumaran Nagar Police Station or Guindy Police Station is not properly established by the prosecution side.

29.         From the prosecution  evidence available on record shows that, it reveals that originally, due to previous enmity between the accused 1 to 3, they kidnapped the deceased Rajasekar and PW2 Babu from the Auto Stand to the   Jayaraj Theatre near Wine Shop. In that place, there was a quarrel between them and the accused 1 to 3 cut the PW2 Babu’s throat with a kinfe and he got severe injury and ran away from the occurrence place and rushed to the R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station and lodged a complaint by Babu and FIR also registered as Cr.No.93/2012.  The wine shop comes under the Jurisdiction of R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station. But the accused 1 to 3 kidnapped the deceased Rajasekar @ Settu  through the Auto bearing regn.No. TN-09-BE-5866 (M.O.7) to the Guindy Industrial Estate Canal on 18.01.2012 at 08.00 p.m., and purchased the blades from PW11 shop and committed murder by way of cutting the neck of the Rajasekar. Hence, the  PW 16 Post mortem Doctor reported that  the person might have died due to shock and hemorrhage because of the cut injury sustained on the neck and dead body of the deceased Rajasekar was recovered behind the Guindy Industrial Estate Canal on

19.01.2012 and the same was identified by his mother PW1, brother PW2 and Auto

Driver PW3. Hence, the commission of murder occurred in the  Guindy Industrial

Estate Canal, it comes under the Jurisdiction of the Guindy Police Station. Therefore, the arguments put forth by the counsel for the 2^nd accused is not sustainable.

30.         During the course of questioning the accused U/s.313(1) (b) of Cr.P.C., this court has categorically explained the incriminating evidence available on record and they denied the same as false and they did not denied the contention found.

31.         PW2 Babu, who is the direct eyewitness and he was involved in the commission of the occurrence and he sustained cut injuries in his neck through the knife of the accused 1 to 3. Likewise, the complainant PW1 is the circumstantial witness. The PW3 Auto Driver, who is in the Auto Stand on the date of occurrence, who has seen the occurrence, when the accused 1 to 3 kidnapped the deceased Rajasekaran and Babu  from the Auto Stand. Therefore, he is directly seen the occurrence and he known about the previous enmity between them. He is the independent witness. PW1 and PW2 are the mother and brother of the deceased of Rajasekaran. Therefore, PW3 is the direct eyewitness when the accused kidnapped the deceased and his evidence is cogent and  corroborated the incident as per the evidence of PW1 and PW2. Further, he had searched the victim for the whole night but not found out.

32.         On perusal of the prosecution evidences,  PW-1 is a key witness in this case, having provided direct testimony regarding the events leading to Settu @

Rajasekaran’s death, the witness has corroborated with the other witness PW-2,  to PW-7 and other witnesses, PW-1 confirming that the Accused 1 to 3 had a history of previous enmity with Settu @Rajasekaran. PW-1 to  PW-7 testimony is crucial as it establishes the 1 to 3 accused’s motive and prior conduct, confession and recovery which is indicative of premeditation and malice intention.  The Material Objects (M.O-1 to M.O-18): These material objects include forensic evidence collected from the crime scene, such as the knife, blades used in the assault, bloodstained clothing and other relevant items. These objects provide tangible proof of the violent nature of the attack and directly link of all the accused in the crime. The charge under Section 364, 302 r/w 34 of IPC is for murder, which requires the prosecution to prove that the accused committed the act with the intention of causing death or with the knowledge that such an act would likely cause death. The evidence presented, including the testimony of  PW-1  to  PW-7 and other witnesses and the exhibits, clearly establishes that Accused 1 to 3 had  motive,  intention and knowledge to commit the murder of the deceased Rajasekaran. The charges U/S. 364, 302 r/w 34 of IPC as against the 2^nd  accused  is proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution side. It is evident that  the 2^nd accused is found guilty of the murder of Settu @ Rajasekaran.

33.         Based on the evidence presented, including the testimony of PW-1 and other witnesses, the exhibits marked as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-24, and the material objects (M.O-1 to M.O-18), It appears that  due to the previous enmity between them they have planned and made  quarrel with them they were forced to kipnapped the deceased and brutally committed  the murder.  It is evident that the 2^nd accused,

Ganesan is guilty of the murder of  Rajasekaran @ Settu.  The prosecution had established the intent, motive, and direct involvement of the 1 to 3 accused in the offence. From the evidence available on records shows that accused 1 to 3  have brutally cut  the Rajasekaran’s neck with blades and  causing death to him. Due to cut the neck Rajasekaran died. The PW3, PW4, PW5, PW6, PW7  were corroborated PW1 and PW2. Therefore, the presence of  the 1 to 3 accused in the scene of occurrence  is proved by the prosecution beyond all reasonable doubt. During pendency of this case, the 1^st and 3^rd accused reported died, Hence, Charges leveled against them abated.   In view of the aforesaid, the prosecution has proved the charges levied against  the 2^nd  accused. Therefore, the considered view of this court is that the nature of death of deceased Rajasekaran is homicidal in nature .

34.         In view of the above discussions and the reasons given therein, the commission  of the offence by the  2^nd  accused at that time of occurrence has been proved by the prosecution beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, the considered view of this court is that the prosecution has proved the charges against  the 2^nd accused  and this court found guilty U/S. 364, 302 r/w 34 of IPC  and the  point is answered accordingly.

35.         After finding the guilty of the 2^nd  accused U/S. 364, 302 r/w 34 of IPC  , this court questioned 2^nd  accused U/s.235(2) of Cr.P.C., with regard to the punishment to be imposed and they  replied as follows in Tamil

2ஆம் எதிரியின் /தில் –  நான் தப்பு எதுவும் /ண்;வில்றை:. குறை ந்த /ட்& தண் றை; வழங்கும்/டி தேகட்டுக்சகாள்கிதே ன்.

36.         This court carefully considered the above said request  of  the 2nd accused. While deciding the quantum of the punishment, the mitigating and the aggravating circumstances has to be taken into account and it appears that there is no previous case or previous conviction found against these accused.  The 2nd accused is  hardcore criminal endangering the human society. The facts and circumstances of this case is  falls under the category of rarest of rare case.  It appears that  due to the previous enmity between them they have planned and made quarrel with them they were forced to kipnapped the deceased and brutally committed  the murder. Therefore this court is inclined to impose maximum punishment to  the 2nd accused U/S. 364, 302 r/w 34 of IPC , and decided this point  accordingly.

37.         In the result,   the  2^nd  accused is found  guilty under section U/S.364, 302 r/w 34 of IPC and he is convicted and sentenced to undergo punishment of Life imprisonment under section U/S.364 of IPC, and  a fine of Rs.10,000/- imposed on the 2^nd accused,  failing which, Two years Rigorous Imprisonment imposed and the

2^nd accused is convicted and sentenced to undergo punishment of Life imprisonment

U/S.302 r/w 34 of IPC, and  a fine of Rs.10,000/- imposed on the 2^nd accused failing which, Two years Rigorous Imprisonment  imposed U/S. 235(2) of Cr.P.C. Both sentences shall run concurrently. It is ordered to deduct the period of imprisonment already undergone by the accused  in the prison, U/S.428 of Cr.P.C.,

 The material Objects M.O.1 to M.O.18 seized in this case were  ordered to be  destroyed  after the appeal period is over or if appeal is filed  after the disposal of appeal.

   This Judgment has been dictated by me to the stenographer, computerized by her directly, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court, on Tuesday, the 24^th day of March 2026.

IV Additional Sessions Judge,

                                                                              City Civil & Sessions Court, Chennai.

ANNEXURES:

List of Prosecution side Witnesses:

PW1

: Mrs. Shanthi

PW2

: Mr.M. Babu

PW3

: Mr. P. Ravi

PW4

: Mr. U.Jaheer Hussain

PW5

: Mr. S. Krishnamurthy

PW6

: Mr. D. Kandan

PW7

: Tmt. Malar

PW8

: Mr. A. Sureshkumar

PW9

: Mr. D. Elango

PW10

: Ms. Jothi

PW11

: Mr. R.Sethuraman

PW12

: Mr. Devanesan

PW13

: Mr. M. Udhayakumar

PW14

: Tr. Francis (Transport Section – Police)

PW15

: Dr. Karthick

PW16

: Dr. Sathiyamoorthy

PW17

: Akbar Sait – Property Keeper

PW18           : Ms. Vimali Thiagarajan – Assistant Director of Forensic Sciences Dept.,

PW19     : Tr. K. Subramanian- Inspector of Devakottai, Taluk Police Station

List of Exhibits on the side of the Prosecution :

Exhibits

:

Date

:                                   Description of document

Ex.P1

:

19.01.2012

: Complaint given by PW1

Ex.P2

:

19.01.2012

: Observation Mahazar

Ex.P3

:

19.01.2012

: Seizure Mahazar (Blood stained Thar soil and Blood unstained Thar soil)

Ex.P4

:

29.01.2012

: Admissible portion in the confession statement given by the 1^st accused

Ex.P5

:

29.01.2012

: Admissible portion in the confession statement given by the 2^nd accused

Ex.P6

:

29.01.2012

: Admissible portion in the confession statement given by the 3^rd accused

Ex.P7

:

29.01.2012

: Signature of  PW8 in the Seizure Mahazar

Ex.P8

:

29.01.2012

: Signature of  PW8 in the Seizure Mahazar

Ex.P9

:

29.01.2012

: Signature of  PW8 in the confession statement 1^st accused Nagaraj

Ex.P10

:

29.01.2012

: Signature of PW8 in the confession statement 2^nd accused Ganesh

Ex.P11

:

29.01.2012

: Signature of PW8 in the confession statement 3^rd accused Arul

Ex.P12

:

29.01.2012

: Seizure Mahazar

Ex.P13

:

29.01.2012

: Seizure Mahazar

Ex.P14

:

19.01.2012

: Accident Register (Carbon copy)

Ex.P15

:

20.01.2012

: Post Mortem Certificate

Ex.P16

:

23.02.2012

: BIOL Report – 68/2012 issued by the Forensic Sciences Department

Ex.P17

:

26.06.2012

: Biological Report issued by the Forensic Sciences Department, Government of Tamilnadu.

Ex.P18

:

26.06.2012

: Blood group ‘A’  found Report issued by the Forensic Sciences Department, Government of Tamilnadu.

Ex.P19

:

19.01.2012

: First Information Report

Ex.P20

:

19.01.2012

: Inquest Report

Ex.P21

: 19.01.2012

: Form 91

Ex.P22

: 19.01.2012

: Form 91

Ex.P23

: 29.01.2012

: Form 91

Ex.P24

: 30.01.2012

: From 91

List of Material Objects marked on the side of the Prosecution :

M.O.1 : Blood stained soil with garbage

M.O.2 : Blood unstained soil with garbage

M.O.3 : Blood stained inside of the plastic cover

M.O.4 : Blood stained  Steel knife with black colour handle –               length 23 c.m. a round hole in the hand of knife M.O.5 : Blood stained Supermax Blade (2) without cover

M.O.6 : Blood stained Supermax Balde (3) with cover

M.O.7 : Yellow colour Auto bearing Regn.TN-09-BE-5866               chassis No.MD2AAA GZZ TWD01593 ; Engine

              No.24MBTD 51050, Blood clotted in the seat of two edges               and Blood clotted behind the Auto in the place of keeping things

M.O.8   : Blood stained black colour pant of the deceased

M.O.9   : Blood stained Khakki colour shirt of the deceased

M.O.10 : Blood stained white colour baniyan of the deceased

M.O.11 : Blood stained brown colour inner-wear of the deceased

M.O.12 : Blood stained black colour belt of the deceased

M.O.13  : Blood stained cut piece of black Pant

M.O.14 :  Blood stained cut piece of  Khakki shirt, in that right side of shirt                  torned and right side of the chest in the shirt torned

M.O.15 : Blood stained white banian (cut piece)

M.O.16 : Blood stained brown colour inner-wear (1)

M.O.17 : Blood stained black colour belt (1)

M.O.18 : Blood stained Rexin of back side seat in Auto bearing Regn.No. TN-09-BE-5866 for sample

                      IV Additional Sessions Judge,

                        City Civil & Sessions Court, Chennai.

Draft/Fair/ Copy of

Judgment

in

  Sessions Case  No. 304/2012

   Date: 24.03.2026

IV Additional 

Sessions Court,

 Chennai

ê