Availability of eye witness would render motive insignificant, says court

A division bench comprising Chief Justice VK Tahilramanai and Justice N Anand Venkatesh, said, “Even if the prosecution does not prove the motive, the court can proceed further with the version of the eye witness, once their evidence is credible and satisfies the court.”

As per the prosecution, Roopanraja and John, residents of Oodaikaranpatti village, Cheranmahadevi Taluk, was locked in previous enmity over the later washing his clothes and taking bath near a water pipe.

Prior to the murder, there was a wordy altercation between both Roopanraja and John on November 8, 2015 in front of a tea shop. The next day after the altercation at about 7.15 pm, when Roopanraja was walking towards CSI church situated at Oodaikaranpatti village, John waylaid and attacked him with a billhook on his neck causing his death.

The brother of the deceased who was cited as an eye witness by the prosecution gave a complaint. The Principal Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, on March 21, 2017 sentenced John to life imprisonment for murder.

Following this, John moved an appeal against the sentence claiming that the eyewitness shown by the prosecution could not have seen the occurrence as the body of the deceased was found in front of the house of one Jeyakumar and this place is outside the compound wall of the CSI church and therefore the said witnesses could not have seen the occurrence that happened.

However, the bench on noting that the lower court was satisfied with the competency of the witnesses and rationale answers that were given, said, “A careful reading of the evidence given by the witnesses makes it clear that they have seen the incident and prosecution has rightly examined them as eye witnesses.”

“Even though these witnesses are related to the deceased person, that by itself will not make them interested witnesses and their evidence cannot be discredited on that account. The non-examination of any other independent witnesses by the prosecution is not fatal to the case of theprosecution since the evidence adduced categorically supports the case of the prosecution regarding theincident and the attack made by the appellant against the deceasedperson,” the bench added.

The Madras High Court has directed the State to file a status report on the availability of shelter homes to enable the homeless tide over the acute winter prevailing in Tamil Nadu. A division bench comprising Justice M Sathyanarayanan and Justice P Rajamanickam ordered notice returnable by January 29 on the public interest litigation moved by advocate M Muruganantham. The petitioner had contended that weather in recent times has become extremely cold and thousands of people who cannot afford the luxury of having a roof over their head are struggling to manage the weather. Noting that the government being a welfare state is bound to care for such people left in the lurch, the petitioner said, “The State which is collecting thousands of rupees as tax from the carbon emitting industries which is the main reason for the heavy weather conditions is bound to compensate the homeless.” He further submitted that lack of response from the government in this regard despite repeated representations had prompted him to approach the High Court.