Skip to content


In Re: Rama Goundan - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
Subjectcriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1942Mad275a
AppellantIn Re: Rama Goundan
Excerpt:
- .....offence.2. the whole of the circumstances in this case point to the fact that for some reasons which may not ever be ascertained this was a deliberate murder and a deliberate attempt at concealment. we therefore confirm the conviction and dismiss the appeal. similarly, in a case of this sort the sentence passed was the appropriate sentence and that also is confirmed.3. we notice that the learned judge whilst convicting of murder has also convicted the appellant and sentenced him to seven years rigorous imprisonment for concealing the evidence. whilst as a strict question of law this may not be wrong; it is in our view highly unusual and undesirable. this is a case where the whole question was whether this man was guilty of murder. it was not suggested, the murder was committed by.....
Judgment:

Mockett, J.

1. The appellant has been convicted of the murder of his cousin and has been sentenced to death by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Coimbatore. There is no question that on 24th September last Parama Goundan was murdered. His body was exhumed on 2nd October from the garden of the accused (After discussing the evidence, his Lordship proceeded.) In these circumstances we think that the learned Sessions Judge quite rightly drew the inference from these facts that the accused deliberately murdered his cousin and quite rightly rejected the story told at a somewhat late stage and only when the body was revealed that it was done in a manner which might have reduced this offence to some lesser offence.

2. The whole of the circumstances in this case point to the fact that for some reasons which may not ever be ascertained this was a deliberate murder and a deliberate attempt at concealment. We therefore confirm the conviction and dismiss the appeal. Similarly, in a case of this sort the sentence passed was the appropriate sentence and that also is confirmed.

3. We notice that the learned Judge whilst convicting of murder has also convicted the appellant and sentenced him to seven years rigorous imprisonment for concealing the evidence. Whilst as a strict question of law this may not be wrong; it is in our view highly unusual and undesirable. This is a case where the whole question was whether this man was guilty of murder. It was not suggested, the murder was committed by anybody else and we think that the procedure in the lower Court should not be treated as a precedent in that Court.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //