KANNADHASAN Vs. STATE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal challenges the judgment of the Additional Sessions Division, Fast Track Court-II, Salem, made in S.C.No.216 of 2009 whereby the appellant shown as A2 in the said case was found guilty along with A1 and A3 under sections 302 r/w 109 and 201 of I.P.C. and awarded life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under section 302 r/w 109 IPC and three years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under section 201 IPC.

(2.) The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows:

(3.) Advancing the arguments on behalf of the appellant the learned counsel would submit that in the instant case, the prosecution has no direct evidence to offer but relied on the circumstantial evidence. The circumstances placed by the prosecution were not proved. Apart from that, the proved circumstances did not indicate the nexus of the crime with A2 in the alleged occurrence. According to the prosecution, the occurrence has taken place at about 11.00 p.m. on 1.8.2009. Before the trial Court, the prosecution relied on the extra judicial confession alleged to have been given by A1 to P.W.1 Village Administrative Officer on 10.8.2009 at about 7.00 a.m. where he has spoken about the involvement of A2 and A3. The learned counsel would submit that it is well settled principle of law that the extra judicial confession given by one accused is to be acted upon against the co-accused, there must be other corroborative piece of evidence, otherwise, it cannot be looked into and it cannot be given any evidentiary value.