RAJA GOUNDER Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties in extenso.

(2.) We find that two Courts have found against the appellants more particularly that PW. 1 the first informant, the wife of the deceased, is also the sister-in-law of the appellants as the deceased and the appellants were brothers. It has also come in evidence that the relations between the parties were strained on account of a land dispute and this was the motive for the murder.

(3.) It has been contended by Mrs. K. Sarada Devi, the learned counsel for the appellants, that there were several suspicious circumstances in the prosecution evidence in as much that the FIR had been lodged after 13 hours and there was no explanation forthcoming to explain the delay and this delay has been utilized by the prosecution to evolve a false story and that PW.2 the sister of the deceased and the appellants who had been cited as witness had not been produced as a witness. In addition, it has been argued that in the FIR, PW. 1 had referred to two injuries caused to the deceased but eight injuries had been detected during the post-mortem.