9911796707
TMI Blog1929 (8) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1, he should have convicted the 3rd accused as well. The fact that his name did not appear in Ex. E was, comparatively speaking, of very little significance. 2. That there was ample motive for the murder is clear. In the first place, Thillaikannu was keeping a woman called Nagu and spending money on her, to which his son and no doubt his wife's family objected. In the next, Thillaikannu's relations with his son's wife (P.W. 2) had given rise to constant quarrels. He had been intimate with her before she was married and the intimacy continued after her marriage. About ten days before the murder, the 1st appellant had caught her going to his father's room at night and thrashed her, threatening to kill himself or her, unless h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d helped in the murder. Strong objection has been taken by the defence to the Sessions Judge's procedure in having recalled her, after her deposition had been concluded, in order to put Ex.F to her. There is no force in the objection. Section 540, Criminal Procedure Code, gives a Judge the fullest discretion to recall a witness at any stage of a trial and makes it imperative for him to do so, if he considers further evidence essential to the just decision of the case. Here an essential document had been overlooked by the prosecution and it was the Judge's duty to have it admitted in evidence. To argue that he should not have carried out that duty, as the result was fatal to the accused, is to suggest that the words "just decisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruth. We are told that the confession, having been retracted, cannot be acted upon without material corroboration. There is, of course, no such absolute rule. If the reasons given by ah accused person for having made a confession, which he subsequently withdraws, are, on the face of them, false, it is not apparent why that confession should not be acted on as it stands and without any further corroboration. Not that corroboration is lacking in this instance. It is not likely that the murder was the work of one hand. Thillaikannu's treatment of his daughter-in-law and her husband, his wasting of his substance on P.W. 5, his threat to settle his property on P.W. 1, must all have roused fierce resentment in the daughter-in-law's family ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
