TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (11) TMI 896
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is answer A.13 Ayyanar Nadar instigated the other accused and all of them attacked the deceased with their weapons killing him on the spot. As per the prosecution story the motive for the incident was the serious animosity between Mariappan Nadar PW.13 on the one hand, and A.13 Ayyanar Nadar accused on the other with regard to the affairs of the Nadar community inasmuch that they represented two different groups in the Committee run by the community. It also appears from the record that even prior to this incident, several incidents had taken place between the parties with complaints inter se, not only in court but even in the police station. The incident in question was witnessed by Sornammal, the wife of the deceased, her daughter P.Chell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 148,341 and 302 IPC 1.One year rigorus imprisonment of each of the accused for the offence under Seciton 148 IPC . 2.One month Simple imprisonment for each of them for the offence under Section 341 IPC. 3.Life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC for each of the accused A-9 to A-15 147,341 and 302 1.Six months rigorous Read with 149 IPC imprisonment for the offence under Section 147 IPC for each of the Accused. 2.One month simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 341 IPC. 3.Life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 read with 149 IPC for each of the accused. A-13 323 IPC Six months simple....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edence could be attached to the investigations whatsoever and that it was thus open to the appellants to contend that the evidence collected by both the police officers was liable to be disbelieved. He has further pointed out that in the background of the fact that there were as many as 15 or 16 accused there was no way to identify and to adjudicate upon the culpability of one set of accused from the other and as such all the appellants were entitled to acquittal. He has also pointed out that no independent witness had been examined though many were available in the village in which the incident happened and this too cast a doubt on the prosecution story. The learned counsel for the State, Mr. S.Thananjayan has on the contrary, submitted....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o involve them in the incident. He has also urged that the reasons given by the High Court in acquitting the accused were not justified. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. Section 173(8) read as under: "173(8): Notwithstanding in this Section shall be deemed to preclude further investigation in respect of an offence after a report under sub- section (2) has been forwarded to the Magistrate and, whereupon such investigation, the officer in charge of the police station obtains further evidence, oral or documentary, he shall forward to the Magistrate a further report or reports regarding such evidence in the form prescribed; and the provisions of sub-sections (2) to (6) shall, as far a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed was that the said investigation had not been fair. We are, therefore, of the opinion that in fact PW.27 had carried out a further investigation in the matter and not a re- investigation. Mr. Natarajan has relied on several judgments in support of his plea that what had been done was a re-investigation. They are 1998(5) SCC 223 (K.Chandrashekharan vs. State of Kerala & Ors.), 2008(5) SCC 413 (Ramachaudhary vs. R.Dodhaya Kuamar and Anr.), 2009 (6) SCC 346 (Mitha Bai Pasabai Patel & Ors. vs. State of Gujarat) and 332 (Rama Chandran vs. State of Bihar). The judgments merely reiterate the legal position that further investigation and not a fresh re-investigation can be made but, as already mentioned above, the nature of the investigation whet....