POONGAVANAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is made to the judgment dated 29.7.2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nilgiris, Udhagamandalam in S.C. No.23 of 2009, whereby the sole accused stood charged, tried and found guilty as per the charge of murder and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment.

(2.) THE short facts necessary for the disposal of the case can be stated thus:-

(3.) ADVANCING arguments on behalf of the appellant, learned counsel would submit that in the instant case, to prove its case, the prosecution relied on two witnesses viz. P.Ws.1 and 2. P.W.1 is the paternal aunt of the deceased, P.W.2 is the husband of P.W.1 and thus, both of them were interested witnesses. If their evidence is subjected to careful scrutiny, their evidence could not be believed. With regard to Ex.P1 report and corresponding First Information Report as put forth by the prosecution, one witness says, it was recorded by the Sub Inspector of Police at the place of occurrence. The other witness says that it was recorded at the Hospital. It was not believable. Insofar as recovery of Material Objects are concerned, the evidence given by the witnesses is inconsistent.